W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Test case document, simple entailment: preferred option.

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:50:06 +0000 (GMT)
To: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
Cc: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0311071941120.19358@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Jan Grant wrote:

> Looking for guidance from the WG here (and in particular from JJC since
> he's the WebOnt test case editor).

Apologies to Jos! Who is, of course, co-editor.

In a nutshell, since the owners of many testcase harnesses are present
(so disemination of this change won't be too difficult),
I think that the selection of an rdf:List-based approach for declaring
(a) entailment rules and (b) "supported" datatype requirements for test
cases really comes down to the impact on WebOnt's test cases.

As to the impact on this WG's test case documents:

- the range of entailmentRules and datatypeSupport become rdf:List; the
testcase schema document would need to be updated.
- the syntax for the Manifest files would use rdf:parseType=collection
to keep the parsing of manifest files simple.
- simple entailment rules are indicated by an empty entailment rules
list.

The various manifests would need rewriting (pretty trivially
automatable).



-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
Goedel would be proud - I'm both inconsistent _and_ incomplete.
Received on Friday, 7 November 2003 14:53:20 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Friday, 7 November 2003 14:53:23 EST