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

Re: Agenda/Logistics, Oct 2 telecon

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:52:28 +0300
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200310011052.28577.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Jim
here is a list of test related items that I am aware of, maybe for under 3.3 
in the agenda

[[
3.3 - Peter and Jeremy have noted some discrepancies between Test and 
S&AS, since both are normative, these need resolution.  There seems 
to be little dispute, but WG should approve any of these needing a 
decision
]]


A) URIs starting in "/" and "."

B) uri references without a type
B.1) as object of annotation properties
B.2) as user defined datatype

C) Semantic Layering Bug

D) obsoleting/rejecting cardinality-007

===

In detail:



A) URIs starting in "/" and "."

Test cases:
 virtually all in section:
7.3.4 Difficult OWL Lite Tests
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/dl-600-harderlite#dl-600-harderlite

[Suggest chair's discretion as to whether to allow time for this one]

    Charles did not like this,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0137
    I admitted they were unintended
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0148
   Noone else seemed bothered
   We could do nothing, or we could consider a proposal:

PROPOSE modify appendix B stylistic preferences of Test Cases to exclude 
relative URIs starting in "/" or ".".

If no time is allowed I will not make any changes.

B) uri references without a type

B.1) as object of annotation properties
Test case:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByFunction#AnnotationProperty-003

jeremy:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0313
peter:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0319

My preference is:
PROPOSE modify S&AS to ensure that urireference objects of annotation 
properties are one of 
datatypeID, classID, individualID, ontologyID, datavaluedPropertyID, 
individualvaluedPropertyID, annotationPropertyID, ontologyPropertyID.

B.2) as user defined datatype
Test case:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByIssue#I5.8-016

(also note test I5.8-013, I5.8-014, I5.8-015 which are related)

jeremy:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0154
peter:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0181

I would be happy with either:
- modifying S&AS to require an
  ddd rdf:type rdfs:Datatype .
 triple
or
-modifying S&AS to be underdefined in this area
cf.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0283

C: Semantic Layering Bug
Test case:
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByFunction#Ontology-002
http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByFunction#Ontology-003

Jeremy:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0256
Peter:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0264

I am not sure what we need to do here. Suggest some actions need to be 
assigned.

D: obsoleting/rejecting cardinality-007
An incorrect proposed test case published as part of the CR.
Test case:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-test-20030818/proposedByFunction#cardinality-007

jeremy:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Sep/0131


I could just go ahead and obsolete this, but at least wanted a heads up at the 
telecon. Alternatively
PROPOSE we reject test cardinality-007

(somewhat stronger statement)


Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 04:54:01 GMT

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