W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > June 2009

Re: update #2 on [comments on 28 April Working Draft of EARL Schema]

From: Johannes Koch <johannes.koch@fit.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:00:51 +0200
Message-ID: <4A263BC3.3040102@fit.fraunhofer.de>
To: ERT WG <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
Shadi Abou-Zahra schrieb:

> Diego Berrueta wrote:
>> 2) It is not clear whether the conformance requirements must take into
>> account the RDF(S) semantics. For instance, is the following report
>> valid wrt requirement 2?
>>  
>>     ex:assertion rdf:type ex:MyAssertionClass .
>>     ex:MyAssertionClass rdfs:subClassOf earl:Assertion .
>>  
>> Strictly speaking, there isn't any earl:Assertion in the report.
>> However, RDF(S) Semantics dictate that the triples above entail
>> (ex:assertion, rdf:type, earl:Assertion), thus making the requirement
>> pass.
>>  
>> We suggest to explicitly clarify whether the RDF(S) entailment rules
>> must be applied before checking the conformance rules.

I think they must be applied.

> I think that part of the issue is that we use the wording "referenced 
> by", and point to specific classes. For instance:
> 
> * "Every Assertion must have exactly one Assertor (referenced by 
> earl:assertedBy)"
> 
> Here an attempt at refining this wording (as suggested by Diego):
> 
> * "Every Assertion must have exactly one Assertor (an Object of 
> earl:assertedBy)"
> 
> Is this correct, and is it what we want?

With RDFS (domain and range), every resource being used as a subject in 
a triple with an earl:assertedby predicate is an earl:Assertion; and 
every resource being used as an object in this triple is an 
earl:Assertor. Is it sufficient to say that we want at least one triple 
with an earl:assertedBy predicate?

-- 
Johannes Koch
Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Information Technology FIT
Web Compliance Center
Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany
Phone: +49-2241-142628    Fax: +49-2241-142065
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 09:01:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 June 2009 09:01:25 GMT