W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > October 2003

Re: entailment-from-inconsistent-graph: new test case request

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:31:38 -0500
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-archive@w3.org, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1066228298.27312.135.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 09:19, Brian McBride wrote:
> We have a request to add a new test case:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20031010-comments/#entailment-from-inconsistent-graph

Er... this looks like the start of a separate issues list again.

Please just track comments; i.e. make sure the mail gets answered.
I recommend against sorting by document and I *strongly*
recommend agains making up new names.

In WebOnt, we relied on the comment archive as the authoritative
source, and built an automated index that allowed us to see
which threads weren't closed:
  http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/lc-status-report.html

I can't really recommend the automation technique without
reservation; it took about 45 minutes to regenerate by
the end. So manual tracking might be easier. But
try not to shift the focus from the issues list
and the comments archive when you're tracking.

> 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?
> 
> Brian
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2003 10:35:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:36 GMT