- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 12:47:29 -0500
- To: "Ian Horrocks" <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Bernardo Cuenca Grau" <bcuencagrau@googlemail.com>, "Mike Smith" <msmith@clarkparsia.com>, "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>, "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Some comments on conformance: I wonder whether there should be a more specific pointer to the restrictions mentioned in the syntactic conformance, i.e. rather than just pointing to the syntax document, pointing to http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Global_Restrictions_on_Axioms A nit on the must accept/generate RDF/XML. Because of the syntactic restrictions in RDF/XML that prevent serialization of all RDF, for some OWL 2 Full document one MUST do something that isn't possible. I suggest a footnote saying something about this. An alternative would be to specify that NTRIPLES must be acceptable as well. "with respect to a datatype map" -> "with respect to its datatype map" (i.e. the datatype map that the entailment checker supports, as described in subsequent lines). "for example, very large integers". Do we not need a summary of what minimal conformance for literals are? "must return Error if an input document uses datatypes that are not supported by its datatype map or literals that it does not support (for example, very large integers); and" I wonder whether the appropriate response here is Unknown rather than Error. It seems rather like not having enough resources to evaluate the check. "The properties of OWL 2 Full, DL, EL and QL entailment checkers mean that query answering should be both sound and complete. In the case of OWL RL, query answering should be sound, and will also be complete if both the ontology and the query satisfy the constraints described in Theorem 1." Should the "will also be complete" read "should also be complete"? -Alan On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > > I updated Conformance and Test Cases [1] both to reflect the resolution of > issue 150 [2] and to address outstanding review comments that were captured > in editors notes. The diff can be found at [3]. Please let me know if you > are satisfied with the current state of the document (modulo test cases). > > Ian > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Conformance_and_Test_Cases > [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/tracker/issues/150 > [3] > http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php?title=Conformance_and_Test_Cases&diff=14372&oldid=14291 > >
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2008 17:48:12 UTC