- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:14:19 +0100
- To: phayes@ai.uwf.edu
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Pat, This is about [[ [14:48:35] scribe-Aaron -action Jos / write up something to describe these entailment tests (with help from Pat) ]] -- http://ilrt.org/discovery/chatlogs/rdfcore/2001-09-21.html#T14-48-35 I've tried to put something together and used already some of your words... -- Jos A proposal for entailment tests. ------------------------------- We have to make a distinction between entailment in RDF [1] and entailment in RDFS [2]. In pure RDF, e.g. 'rdfs:range' and 'rdf:Property' are just urirefs with no special meaning, but they do have a special meaning in RDFS. That is why we have to have extra rules, or something, to capture all of RDFS. We describe an RDF/RDFS entailment test in RDF (a matter of eating your own dogfood) so that they have a precise and machine understandable description e.g. [ tc:graph g1, g2, g3 ] tc:entailrdf [ tc:graph g4 ]. describes the RDF entailment of the graph g4 given the graphs g1, g2 and g3 and [ tc:graph g1, g2, g3 ] tc:rdfsentail [ tc:graph g4 ]. describes the RDFS entailment of the graph g4 given the graphs g1, g2, g3 and the rules in [2]. <comment> tc: is a namespace prefix for a testcase schema gi is a uriref of a .rdf or .nt testcase graph we can write that straightforward in N-triples </comment> The syntax testcases can be described in the same manifest file as e.g. [ tc:graph g1 ] tc:entailrdf [ tc:graph g2 ]. [ tc:graph g2 ] tc:entailrdf [ tc:graph g1 ]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/RDF-model-theory/#entailrdf [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/RDF-model-theory/#rdfsentail
Received on Friday, 21 September 2001 19:14:25 UTC