W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > September 2009

Re: passing negative entailment tests

From: Stella Mitchell <stellamit@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:31:24 -0400
Message-ID: <d64b0f2c0909280531q17385059ga62b14ba20f8446c@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Thanks for the comments.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

>
> I was surprised to read in Test:
>
>   Note that while ideally the RIF consumer would be able to
>   conclusively demonstrate that the conclusion cannot be drawn from the
>   premises, in practice a failure to draw the conclusion after a
>   thorough attempt to do so can be considered a successful outcome.
>
> Is this based on a WG decision I'm forgetting?   If so, I apologize.
>
> My sense right now is that this isn't okay.  To determine a negative
>


I removed that sentence.



> Maybe in test-results-reporting we can allow for a 'nearly-passed' or
> 'weak pass', to give some sort of partial credit.  Really, these folks
> just got lucky.
>
> In OWL 1, a system was supposed to report this as 'undecided'.  That's
> better than failing (deciding, but deciding incorrectly), and probably
> better than not reporting any result, but still not as good as a 'pass'.
>
> I still like that solution.
>
I changed 'unknown' to 'undecided' in the result description.

Stella
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 12:32:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 28 September 2009 12:32:06 GMT