Jos De_Roo wrote: > > If I'm not mistaken, this is a machine generated file > (Jeremy did all that work and I'm very glad with that) > and mainly intended for machines; I believe there > is no false information in there; maybe there is some > information in there that is not very relevant (resulting > from some graph merging I guess) but at least my machine > is not having trouble with that (and it was a good test > case on its own btw, ie I found some bugs that way). > Anyhow a cleanup could be in order, what do you think > Jeremy? Cleaning it up is a lot of work. It depends on the particular issue. The point that a particular rdfs:Class should be an owl:Class could be addressed (the underlying problem is that http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology is distinctly OWL Full rather than OWL DL. It may be possible to tweak the code that generates it. The current algorithm is something like: - read all the relevant files ( testOntology, manifests, some others ) - dump it to the Manifest.rdf file - generate the test cases doc It would probably be slightly better if I changed it to: - read all the relevant manifest files - dump it to the Manifest.rdf file - read all the other files ( testOntology, manifests, some others ) - generate the test cases doc Don't expect anything human readable - the individual manifest files are just about intelligible. I will add Peter's message to my todo list, and get back when I have done whatever I feel is worth the effort. JeremyReceived on Monday, 9 June 2003 03:09:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:00 GMT