W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2002

WOWG: Proposed test cases for qualified cardinality constraints

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 12:58:43 +0100
To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JAEBJCLMIFLKLOJGMELDKELCCDAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

I attach test cases for the qualified cardinality constraints which we have
agreed are not part of OWL.

I ask that the chairs schedule time in a telecon to discuss the following
proposal:

I propose:

[[[

The WebOnt WG:
- approves the error test cases showing that qualified cardinality
constraints are not part of OWL.
- actions Dan Connolly to arrange a test repository on the http://www.w3.org
site
- actions Dan Connolly to arrange direct CVS access for appropriate members
of the test focus area to that repository
- actions Jeremy Carroll to update the repository to include the approved
qualified cardinality constraint test cases.

Moreover, the WG assigns to the test focus area responsibility for
maintaining the approved test cases in light of future changes made to OWL
by the WG (for example, the assignment of an appropriate namespace).

]]]

Jeremy


For convenience I show error001.owl inline here, with a blow-by-blow
breakdown (in **s):

***START BOILER PLATE***
<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!--
  Copyright World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of
  Technology, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en
  Automatique, Keio University).

  All Rights Reserved.

  Please see the full Copyright clause at
  <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software.html>

***END BOILER PLATE***
  Description: A DAML+OIL qualified cardinality constraint is not
               legal OWL.
  Author: Jeremy Carroll (jjc@hpl.hp.com)


-->


*** For now we use the DAML+OIL namespace,
   this is separated out here for easy maintenance
   when the WG agrees on the OWL namespace URI.
   Of course, this means that right now this test case
   is actually false. This is a legal DAML+OIL document!
***
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF

   <!ENTITY owl "http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil#">
]>

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:eg="http://example.org/"
         xmlns:owl="&owl;"
    >

*** A minimal example, that is legal DAML+OIL but not legal OWL. ***

   <owl:Restriction owl:cardinalityQ="1">
      <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#exampleProp"/>
      <owl:hasClassQ rdf:resource="#exampleClass"/>
   </owl:Restriction>

</rdf:RDF>




*** END ***

error002 is just like error001 but with a max cardinality constraint.
error003 is just like error001 but with a min cardinality constraint.





Received on Wednesday, 17 April 2002 08:01:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:49 GMT