Re: tests and inference?

On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 10:09 -0500, Kendall Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:02:13AM -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> > How about adding...
> > 
> >   "The dataset gives the exact graph against which the query is
> >   evaluated (no further inference is used to determine the
> >   input graph)."
> 
> Better: "The dataset gives the precise graph against which the query
> is to be evaluated: inference must not be used to determine or modify
> the input graph."

That's a misuse of "must not", IMO. We don't write
"the sum of 2 and 2 must be 4"; we just
write "the sum of 2 and 2 is 4".

Also, graphs aren't mutable.

Please let's stick to "is not".

cf

 must is for agents
 http://www.w3.org/2001/01/mp23
 <- http://esw.w3.org/topic/RfcKeywords


> > The SPARQL QL spec is already explict enough, to me, but Kendall
> > if you can think of a way to make it more explicit, very well,
> > but keep in mind that the QL is sorta orthogonal to inference.
> 
> Uh, yes, I know that it's "sorta orthogonal"; or, well, I think that
> it is orthogonal.
> 
> My point about the Sparql spec is that it doesn't help a person who
> wants to figure out why all of her tests are failing because her
> triple store defaultedly does RDFS inference (say) on all graphs. In
> fact, if there's nothing in the test suite about this issue, and a
> person goes and looks at the Sparql spec, the language about
> orthogonality of inference and query misleads *further*.
> 
> So, I'm not suggesting any changes in this regard to the Sparql spec
> itself.

Then we're agreed. Very well.

> Hope that's clearer.
> 
> Kendall
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E