Re: description-logic/inconsistent107 was RE: minor typos in Test doc

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> There does seem to be a lot of spurious stuff here - I would have thought
> that the following is inconsistent
>
> Ontology(
>
>  Class(a:Unsatisfiable complete
>   intersectionOf(
>                 restriction(a:r someValuesFrom a:c)
>                 complementOf(restriction(a:r minCardinality(2)))
>                 restriction(a:r someValuesFrom a:d)))
>
>  Class(a:c)
>  Class(a:d)
>
>  ObjectProperty(a:r)
>
>  Individual(_
>   type(a:Unsatisfiable))
>
>
>  DisjointClasses(a:c a:d)
>
>
> )

I believe that's right. I think that what's happened here is that the
original tests used some common set-up machinery that wasn't used in every
test, and that extra stuff just all got translated too.

Mind you, maybe it's worth having tests with spurious stuff in them just
to push the implementations a little more (and make it harder for
implementors to cheat :-)), so perhaps we leave the original in and add
the trimmed one??

	Sean

-- 
Sean Bechhofer
seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb