> As an example we apply this to one line in the central OWL > document (Semantics and Abstract Syntax) i.e. the definition of unionOf in > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/direct.html#3.2 > > The clear if somewhat mathematical definition becomes the following text: > > [[ > If x is in the interpretation of unionOf(c1 ... cn) then there MUST be some > i such that x is in the interpretation of ci. If x is in the interpretation > of ci then x MUST be in the interpretation of unionOf(c1 ... cn). > ]] > > (Note the two MUSTs are separately testable). > > Doing that a hundred times over would have made the document unreadable, > for the relatively minor advantage of being able to quantify the coverage > of the specification by the test suite, and to better link each test to the > aspect of the specification that it was trying to explore. I don't understand the "hundred times over" aspect to this. Is it because of "c1 ... cn", or because unionOf is only one of many parts of OWL, or something else? -- sandroReceived on Wednesday, 17 December 2003 06:49:20 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:03 GMT