- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 19:36:35 +0200
- To: "Sandro Hawke <sandro" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, sandro@roke.hawke.org, www-webont-wg@w3.org, jjc@hpl.hp.com
just on that specific point from Sandro: > I have no expectation of making any progress on the Negative Entailment > Tests or Consistent tests, however. I also refused for months to run negative entailment tests and consistency tests as they are not really fitting with constructive stuff (no no proof is not a proof). For now I run them and find them quite useful. For instance finding a proof for a negative entailment test (which we happen to have) is unsound; same for finding that a consistent formula is inconsistent. Otoh, because our axiomatization is incomplete the results of those tests are actually incomplete, but another incomplete than timeout... -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Sunday, 7 September 2003 13:42:48 UTC