W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webont-comments@w3.org > October 2003

Re: Chair's Challenge response

From: Jack Berkowitz <jack.berkowitz@networkinference.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:40:22 +0100
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: <public-webont-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BBA9FC86.7BDB%jack.berkowitz@networkinference.com>


Thanks for the quick notice.  We hope to see the OWL.OWL prize soon ;-)

Charles' note referred to two specific concerns:

1) The formatting of the results and the summaries to make a differentiation
between the OWL-DL tests and the OWL-FULL tests (grouping and the method of
calculating % passed).

2) The consideration by the working group of 30 or so tests that are
currently expressed in OWL-FULL syntax, but with a slight change, could be
expressed in OWL-DL syntax.  The central point is that the reasoning
required for the test to be completed is within the bounds of the DL scope,
but for the undeclared resource issue.  I believe that the working group is
considering this proposal.  Note that I believe that the working group
already has decided that "padding" of syntax by systems is not acceptable.
So we are suggesting a slightly different approach in that the tests are
actually changed slightly.  In Charles note [1] below, he indicates that he
will send that full listing into the working group shortly.

Best regards,


> From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 12:26:40 -0400
> To: Jack Berkowitz <jack.berkowitz@networkinference.com>
> Cc: public-webont-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Chair's Challenge response
>> The RDF results file is available at:
>> http://demo.networkinference.com/tests/cerebra08102003.rdf
> Thanks, I've incorporated the results in the report.
>  "Approved Tests Passed 0 times: None"
>> Further test results may be made available by Network Inference in the
>> future, pending the resolution of outstanding issues regarding the reporting
>> and presentation of test results, which have been raised to the WebOnt
>> group.
> Are you referring to Charles White's proposal to modify "30 or so"
> tests [1], or have I missed some purely presentational issue?  If the
> latter, I apologize; could you please remind me?
>    -- sandro   (OWL Test Results [2] maintainer)
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Oct/0072
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2003 12:40:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:29 UTC