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

Re: Test cases, quick update.

From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:11:00 +0100
To: "Graham Klyne <GK" <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFF9449050.B858A9EF-ONC1256C8D.00477FB2-C1256C8D.00486F0C@agfa.be>




>At 08:10 PM 12/11/02 +0100, Jos De_Roo wrote:
>>[[[
>>### inconsistency/incompleteness detections @@
>>
>>{ :xsdI1 . ?p rdfs:range xsd:string . ?s ?p ?x^^xsd:decimal } log:implies
>>{ _:x a test:False-Document } .
>>]]]
>>
>>and then indeed we can derive from above that
>>
>>_:y a test:False-Document .
>
>I'm sorry but I'm really struggling with this... as far as I can tell, all

>the above says is that the antecedent implies there exists a false
>document, which seems pretty strange to me.

we just wanted to express that there exists a
false document if we have asserted for instance

  :s1 :p1 "10"^^xsd:decimal .
  :p1 rdfs:range xsd:string .

but indeed we don't further describe the
particular false or inconsistent document

I was experimenting with a similar kind of
inconsistency/incompleteness detections for OWL
such as in http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/owl-rules
but I'm still struggling as well...


>#g
>
>
>-------------------
>Graham Klyne
><GK@NineByNine.org>

-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 12 December 2002 08:12:09 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:52 EDT