W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Test cases for approval

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:52:58 +0000
Cc: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <146FCA23-0392-49BA-8699-2E8D1196A91B@deri.org>
To: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
just looked quickly over those, manual inspection...


On 22 Feb 2011, at 16:02, Birte Glimm wrote:

> Hi all,
> I ran the following OWL Direct Semantics tests cases and they pass:
> :owlds01 -- Test: OWL DS bnodes are not existentials

looks ok to me.

> :owlds02 -- Test: OWL DS bnodes are not existentials with answer

looks ok to me.

> :plainLit -- Test: Plain literals with language tag are not the same

looks ok to me (but why is this OWL/Entailment specific? It would be, potentially if you asked for 
"name"^^xsd:string under D-entailment?)

didn't look into the bind0x tests yet...

Axel

> as the same literal without
> :bind01 -- Test: bind01 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind02 -- Test: bind02 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind03 -- Test: bind03 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind04 -- Test: bind04 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind05 -- Test: bind05 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind06 -- Test: bind06 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> :bind07 -- Test: bind07 - BIND fixed data for OWL DL
> 
> The bind0x test cases are as for simple entailment, but the input data
> is extended o make it an OWL 2 DL ontology.  The test :plainLit is
> applicable also under OWL 2 RDF Based semantics.
> Birte
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 309
> Computing Laboratory
> Parks Road
> Oxford
> OX1 3QD
> United Kingdom
> +44 (0)1865 283520
> 
Received on Tuesday, 1 March 2011 14:54:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT