W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2012

RE: Manually checking entailment tests (ACTION-685) - part1

From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 09:51:26 +0200
To: "birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de" <birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de>
CC: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9DA51FFE5E84464082D7A089342DEEE80149E3ECC775@ATVIES9917WMSX.ww300.siemens.net>
Thanks, this answers my concerns and I think the tst cases
I had mentioned in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012OctDec/0018.html

plus

http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/entailment/manifest.ttl#paper-sparqldl-Q1-rdfs

are ready for approval.

I am sorry but I won't get to do more befor today's telco, but we have at least a handful
of test cases as a starting point for the entailment test-suite, which should be sufficient to proceed to CR.

Best,
Axel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Birte Glimm [mailto:birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de]
> Sent: Montag, 08. Oktober 2012 12:56
> To: Polleres, Axel
> Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Manually checking entailment tests (ACTION-685) - part1
>
> Hi Axel,
>
> thanks for looking at the tests. I comment inline below.
>
> Birte
>
> On 2 October 2012 14:52, Polleres, Axel
> <axel.polleres@siemens.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> > bind06 ... looks ok, but why do we need both bind06, and
> bind01 (seems
> > the only diff is the select clause)
>
> The tests are adapted tests from the standard SPARQL test
> suite and, indeed, the only difference is the SELECT * versus
> SELECT ?var clause.
> Nevertheless it might be useful to test that since some
> entaiment implementations probably don't run the standard
> tests (e.g., most test data cannot be used with OWL's Direct
> Semantics).
>
> > bind07 ... don't understand, the bind07.srx file has no
> bindings for z
> > at all. shouldn't this have for each ?o two entries, one
> binding z to o+1 and one to o+2?!
>
> No. This is due to the definition of the BIND semantics (see
> 18.2.2.6 of the Query spec): "Each BIND element is translated
> to an extend algebra operator where the graph pattern is the
> immediately preceding basic graph pattern. If the immediately
> preceding syntax element is not a TriplesBlock, an empty
> basic graph pattern is introduced. "
>
> In this case the query pattern is:
>  ?s ?p ?o .
>   ?p a owl:DatatypeProperty .
>   { BIND(?o+1 AS ?z) } UNION { BIND(?o+2 AS ?z) }
>
> In the algebra translation, we first translate a
> GroupGraphPattern and get:
> Join(Z, Bgp(?s ?p ?o . ?p a owl:DataProperty)) simplified to:
> Bgp(?s ?p ?o . ?p a owl:DataProperty)
>
> Then we have to translate a GroupOrUnionGraphPattern. This
> means we start with an empty algebra element A and then have
> to translate the BIND element. Since A is empty, we introduce
> empty graph pattern for the bind translation. This happens
> again when we translate the second element of the union
> clause and overall we get:
> Join(
>     Bgp(?s ?p ?o . ?p a owl:DatatypeProperty),
>     Union(
>       Extend(Z, ?z, ?o+1),
>       Extend(Z, ?z, ?o+1)
>     )
> )
> We separately evaluate the Bgp(.) and the Union(.) elements
> and then join the results. The Union(.) element, however,
> just gives the empty mapping since we cannot extend ?o from
> an empty mapping. Joining then gives the results as given in the test.
>
> Note that this test is again just copied over from the
> standard test suite and made suitable for OWL's Direct
> Semantics by adding typing triples. Should the test be wrong,
> then also all standard SPARQL systems should not pass it.
>
> > lang ... looks ok, small remark: why is it called "lang"
> whereas the mf:name says "Literal lang test 2", I suppose
> because "lang test 1" is actually :plainLit?
>
> Yes. This is a test I got from C&P and since I already had
> this plain literal test named plainLit with all the files
> named plainLang.xxx, I just added the index 2. I cleaned this
> up now and we have now plainLit.rq, plainLit.srx and
> plainLit.ttl for the test plainLit and lang.rq, lang.srx and
> lang.ttl for the lang test.
>
>
> > paper-sparqldl-Q1 ... looks ok, it would be nice to have an
> RDFS variant of thant one that does NOT return owl:Nothing,
> additionally.
> done (paper-sparqldl-Q1-rdfs)
>
> --
> Jun. Prof. Dr. Birte Glimm            Tel.:    +49 731 50 24125
> Inst. of Artificial Intelligence         Secr:  +49 731 50 24258
> University of Ulm                         Fax:   +49 731 50 24188
> D-89069 Ulm                               birte.glimm@uni-ulm.de
> Germany
>
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2012 07:51:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:49 GMT