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

Re: Can't access test case manifest, test case comments

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:54:14 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021213145253.03a364e0@127.0.0.1>
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 02:13 PM 12/13/02 +0000, Jan Grant wrote:

>On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> >
> > I was trying to check a test case to confirm something in
> > Concepts/Semantics docs, and found that:
> >
> >    http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xmllang/Manifest.rdf
> >
> > returned an HTTP 403/Forbidden error page.
> >
> > Also:
> >
> > re: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xmllang/test003.rdf
> > The comment is misleading - there is no xml:lang - though the test is OK, I
> > think.
> >
> > Do we have any entailment tests dealing with language-tagged plain 
> literals?
> >
> > E.g.
> >
> > 1.
> >
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat" .
> > ?entails?
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@fr .
> >
> > 2.
> >
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@en .
> > ?entails?
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat" .
> >
> > 3.
> >
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@en .
> > ?entails?
> >      ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@fr .
> >
> > I think the answer is no in each case, and that would be in agreement with
> > my readiong of the docs.
> > Should these be negative entailment test cases?
>
>For historical reasons (they were done at the same time as the related
>DT entailments involving language), see:
>
>http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest.rdf#language-important-for-non-dt-entailment-1

Thanks...

Er, those test cases seem to deal with datatyped literals.  My question was 
with respect to plain literals.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 13 December 2002 15:32:58 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:53 EDT