oops... I gave my reply to the wrong list [[ What a coincidence - while sitting in a plane this evening I did't think to implement a "ex contradictione quodlibet". The premise graphs are assumed to be the case unless they can be proven to be inconsistent and then we just say so and don't explicitly use them further. So we can't run that testcase. ]] -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0050.html sorry, too many outstanding mails... -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.c To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>, Dave Beckett om> <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> Sent by: cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org> w3c-rdfcore-wg-req Subject: entailment-from-inconsistent-graph: new test case request uest@w3.org 2003-10-15 04:19 PM We have a request to add a new test case: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20031010-comments/#entailment-from-inconsistent-graph essentially a gigo test case. Do the test case editors propose to add this test case? How many implementations will pass it? If not enough, what do was say at request to advance to PR? BrianReceived on Thursday, 16 October 2003 18:40:59 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 16 October 2003 18:41:02 EDT