Re: More tests

On Thu, 2003-09-25 at 09:04, Ian Horrocks wrote:
> One type of test that we are missing is small tests that, while
> potentially easy may prove difficult for some naive implementations.

In general, the more tests the merrier...

But it's be even more interesting if you can
relate this test to some use case or requirement;
e.g. "this test demonstrates a pattern that
comes up a lot in modelling oil refinery
options; if your implementation can't do this,
you're not going to be able to sell it to the
oil industry."

> Attached is an example of such a test. The "TEST" class, and hence the
> ontology, is inconsistent. I would like to add several of these kinds
> of test to the test suite.
> 
> I would be interested to hear how the various implementations fare on
> this test (FaCT can pass it in about 10ms, not including parsing).
> 
> The test is currently in DL but could easily be converted into Lite.
> 
> Regards, Ian
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/