W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Test respository; work remaining.

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 23:01:30 +0200
To: "Jan Grant <Jan.Grant" <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: "RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFBB1ACCA6.962075B1-ONC1256B9D.006D20D8@agfa.be>

[...]

> As per the action/decision in
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0010.html
>
> I've added the following tests (without a related issue):
>
> statement-entailment/test001a.nt NOT_ISSUE  PENDING
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
> statement-entailment/test001b.nt NOT_ISSUE  PENDING
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
> statement-entailment/test002a.nt NOT_ISSUE  PENDING
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
> statement-entailment/test002b.nt NOT_ISSUE  PENDING
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Feb/0476.html
>
> That the entailments in each case should not be drawn is detailed in
>
>
http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/statement-entailment/Manifest.rdf

>
> (similar file in the skeleton/ directory). I'd like Jos to have a final
> rundown of this, to ensure that it meets his needs.

Yes it does and we finally got a rundown:
@@ NegativeEntailmentTest <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/statement-entailment/test001b.nt> true
@@ NegativeEntailmentTest <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/statement-entailment/test002b.nt> true
# Generated with http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/#R30017 on Tue Apr 16 21:48:53 CEST 2002
...
(and I think I have to get more sleep and less bugs)
As already said, we run cwm --rdf Manifest.rdf --n3 > Manifest.n3
and try to proof that against itself (creating engines on the fly)

I had to add some rdf:parseType="Resource" attributes to the RDF/XML
as well add some test:NT-Document elements (and I updated the repository)
BTW I'm not sure wether we should avoid - tokens in qname local parts
DanC?

> Basically, an
> entailment test is either positive (if the entailment should hold) or
> negative. Included in the test description are one or more
> <test:entailmentRules> properties that indicate if the rules for
> RDF-entailment, RDFS-entailment (or, in the future, OWL-entailment)
> should be used. Again, the format is pretty much fixed.

that's indeed the "core"!

--
Jos
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 17:07:55 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:30 EDT