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

Re: Datatype test cases/ datatype entailment/ datatype support.

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:52:59 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021125134807.0426db00@127.0.0.1>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

At 06:50 PM 11/22/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>Are the test cases primarily, tests for implementors; or are they primarily
>tests about our language.

There were some words in Concepts that tried to address this in the case of 
entailments:
   http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-concepts/2002-11-05/rdf-concepts.html#section-Entailment

I see this is not in the latest working version.  Probably that's 
fine;  just pointing out.  Are the words any use for the test case draft?

#g
--

At 06:50 PM 11/22/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>[[
>The cross-datatype entailment test cases are reasonably clear cut, from
>a mathematical point of view, I think. But Patrick raises a good point
>when he asks (with a weather eye on implementation?) "what does it mean
>to say that datatype X is supported?"
>]]
>
>Are the test cases primarily, tests for implementors; or are they primarily
>tests about our language.
>
>I think the latter, and implementors have to piggy back.
>
>Thus the schema defintions could read:
>
>
><rdf:Property>
>     rdf:about="&testns;datatypeSupport">
>     <rdfs:comment>The subject of this triple is
>of type test:PositiveEntailmentTest or test:NegativeEntailmentTest,
>in which the entailment is
>a datatype entailment.
>In terms of http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#dtype_interp
>this reflects a D-entailment, where the datatype described by
>the object of this triple is a member of the set D of recognized datatypes.
>    </rdfs:comment>
></rdf:Property>
>
>   <rdfs:Class rdf:about="&testns;PositiveEntailmentTest">
>     <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Positive Entailment Test</rdfs:label>
>     <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">These tests are specified by one or more
>premise documents (in RDF/XML or N-Triples) together with a single
>conclusion document.
>The premise files together entail the conclusion document, as specified
>by the RDF Semantics; where the type of entailment
>(e.g. simple entailment or RDFS-entailment) is  as specified
>  by test:entailmentRules and test:datatypeSupport properties.
></rdfs:comment>
>     <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="&testns;"/>
>   </rdfs:Class>
>
>
>   <rdfs:Class rdf:about="&testns;NegativeEntailmentTest">
>     <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Negative Entailment Test</rdfs:label>
>     <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">These tests are specified by one or more
>premise documents (in RDF/XML or N-Triples) together with a single
>conclusion document.
>The premise files together do not entail the conclusion document, as
>specified
>by the RDF Semantics; where the type of entailment
>(e.g. simple entailment or RDFS-entailment) is  as specified
>  by test:entailmentRules and test:datatypeSupport properties.
></rdfs:comment>
>     <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="&testns;"/>
>   </rdfs:Class>
>
>
>====
>
>The idea is that the definition in testSchema.rdf lead one to think about
>the formal recommendation and what it says, rather than what an implementor
>must or must not do.
>(Which is a topic we have tried to avoid!)
>
>Thus, we do not answer Patrick's question.
>
>Jeremy

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 25 November 2002 09:36:10 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:54:10 EDT