W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > September 2003

[Fwd: browsable test results]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 08:43:22 -0500
To: www-qa@w3.org, w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
Cc: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1063374202.9839.53.camel@dirk.dm93.org>
The WebOnt WG is in CR, and we're using RDF
to manage our test results.
  http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out

  and http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/resultsOntology

Attached find an example of some of the benefits.

I'm only vaguely familar with EARL; I'd appreciate review
from somebody who knows more about it. How much of the
wheel have we reinvented?


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/


attached mail follows:



The folk at AIdministrator have used their software (Sesame RDF engine + 
Spectacle portal generation software) to create an easily accessible version 
of the OWL test-suite.

They're uploading the RDF representation of the test-data into Sesame, then 
Spectacle fires SeRQL queries on that RDF to generate the portal at 
<http://spectacle.aidministrator.nl/spectacle/channel/owltestcases>

The portal allows the test-cases to be browsed along various dimensions 
(status, OWL species, creator, topic).
The portal will be auto-refreshed, so it can be used for inspecting the most 
recent status. Can someone advise on the required refresh-frequency? Is once 
a day enough?

They have done the same for RDF at
<http://spectacle.aidministrator.nl/spectacle/channel/rdftestcases>

It's a nice illustration of the added value there is in generating the 
test-date in RDF form.

For more detail, see their message on rdf-interest, at
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2003Sep/0072.html>

Frank.
   ----
Received on Friday, 12 September 2003 09:43:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:14:00 GMT