Best practices for validating with WASM?

[C-Loftus]

Thank you for your excellent work on this library.

I have a very simple set of functions that I am compiling with wasm-pack to get wasm I can use in the browser. This compiles without issue and works well.

https://github.com/internetofwater/nabu/tree/main/shacl_validator/shacl_validator_grpc_rs/wasm_exportable_lib
Example here: https://github.com/internetofwater/nabu/blob/main/shacl_validator/shacl_validator_grpc_rs/wasm_exportable_lib/src/lib.rs#L36

The one challenge I see however is that it seems like I cannot do shacl validation since the JSON-LD processor is trying to expand the context? I am not entirely clear if there is a way to get around this, but since wasm restricts this sort of network access I was wondering what people do. I am still a little new to shacl but I guess I thought shacl itself didn't necessarily need to do any sort of remote fetching to validate and just checked the shape.

Error when working with the SRDFGraph, JSON-LD error:
No LoadDocumentCallback has been set to load remote contexts Data: Reading JSON-LD

I imagine you could

1. Do any sort of JSON-LD expansion before reading it in
2. Changing permissions to see if it is possible to do it inside wasm itself (unclear if this is possible in the browser) (or do some sort of message passing between the browser and the rust wasm code)

As such I was curious if anyone else is using this and had thoughts. This may be relevant to #30

[labra]

Thanks a lot for raising it. At this moment, we are no experts in wasm so I don't have any suggestion.

I am even surprised that the library works on wasm. I mean, in principle, it should work and one of the goals of rudof from the beginning is supporting wasm, but as we were not aware of any user requesting wasm support we were not taking it very seriously until now.

In the last months we were more focused on having a full implementation of SHACL core and ShEx, and we are almost there. Now, that we did all that work we can focus and prioritize on other features, and supporting for WASM as well as having a Web demo, are indeed features we want to explore...

[C-Loftus]

Thank you for your reply.

That makes sense and is totally reasonable. I will probably continue to look at this in the future sometime so if I have any updates with wasm and find a way to get it working I will update here.