Possible incorrect test case (?)

Dear all,

I've browsed the test cases and observed a possible mistake in one of them.

[ Test WebOnt-Restriction-005, Proposed (2009-06-08) [1]. ]

If I am not wrong, the premise ontology says, in LaTeX/DL syntax:

O1 = { (\leq 0.P \top)(x) }

Which is equivalent to (\forall p.\bot)(x)

The "Nonconclusive ontology" says:

O2 = { (\forall p.C)(x) }

Now, unless I misinterpreted the RDF/XML syntax, I conclude that O1 
entails O2, but the test says "negative entailment".

Pellet passes the test (i.e., it says that O1 does not entail O2), while 
HermiT fails the test (i.e., it says that O1 entails O2).

Am I missing something?

Regards,
AZ.


[1] 
http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/projects/owltests/index.php/TestCase:WebOnt-Restriction-005

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
Post-doctoral researcher at:
Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Galway
IDA Business Park
Lower Dangan
Galway, Ireland
antoine.zimmermann@deri.org
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/