I'm working along similar lines - as one route to providing (partial) OWL support in Jena2. I'm certainly happy to exchange ideas on this. I'm not sure that a common set, that can be mechanically translated into each implementation language, is tractable due to differences in engine assumptions (datalog or not, sets of built-in primitives etc). However, a reference set that developers can use as a guide to specific implementations would be good. There might also be some value in sharing additional test cases. The working group tests are obviously the main tests of concern, but there may be a role for richer test cases for subsets other than OWL-DL (which is well catered for in the WG informative tests). DaveReceived on Monday, 31 March 2003 10:59:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Friday, 25 March 2005 11:20:48 GMT