W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > August 2003

Test-Results and Systems Ontologies (was Re: AGENDA/LOGISTICS...)

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 08:42:21 -0400
Message-Id: <200308261242.h7QCgLBr014904@roke.hawke.org>
To: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Charles White <Charles.White@networkinference.com>, Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org


Sean writes:
> On the telecon, Dan mentioned the possibility of marking up/publishing
> results using RDF. This sounds like a sensible idea and it would be easy
> for me to produce this. Would it be possible to extend the test ontology
> [2] to include descriptions of test results?
> 
> [1] http://wonderweb.man.ac.uk/owl/first-order.shtml
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology

I've been working on this, playing around with some possibilities.  I
don't have the ontology or presentation code done, so I've just jotted
down some notes, below.   I'm thinking of this as a more general
test-results ontology, not really part of the OWL testOntology.


class TestRun
subclasses PassingRun, FailingRun, IncompleteRun
   
      I'm thinking "incomplete" covers the "Unknown" result,
      as well as various sorts of resource-limits, or other
      reported errors.   None of these are as bad as an incorrect
      result being reported as if it were correct, which would
      be a FailingRun

has properties:

   test -- the specific test being run here
   begins -- point in time the run of this test began (xsd:dateTime [1])
   ends -- point in time the run of this test ended
   system -- the complete system being tested (see below)
   output -- a foaf:Document [2] (aka web page) showing more detailed output

For "system", I'm thinking it's important to distinguish between
different releases, since of course the test results could be
different, and to track what OS/Hardware it's running on -- or at
least keep open the option of doing so.   I imagine this being in a
different, "systems" ontology, which would be what the implementation
report would come from.   (This overlaps with what Charles is working
on; I'm not sure how much he's done, or how best to share the work
here.) 

My thinking on systems is:

a System consists of one or more components.  Usually one component
would be the testFocusComponent -- the thing being tested -- while
others would be incidental (but potentially important) bits like the
OS and hardware.    The components are probably Releases, as in:

class Release
class Project

   a Project has zero or more Releases

   a Release may obsolete a previous one,
   maybe be a StableRelease or DevelopmentRelease,
   has a date, a version string, a label, ...

   I think the Project has people and web pages
   associated with it, as well as the main name
   ("euler", "racer", ...).    I'm not sure if 
   programming language and OS information belongs
   with the Project or the Release.

Thoughts?

   -- sandro

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dateTime
[2] http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/#term_Document
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2003 08:42:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:02 GMT