- From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 17:12:05 +0000
- To: Mike Smith <msmith@clarkparsia.com>
- Cc: "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Great work -- thanks! In the case where one or more reasoner fails the test it would be useful to explicitly ask the relevant implementers if they can explain and/or fix their implementations -- this should improve both our confidence in the tests and quality of implementation. I'm not sure what we should do with those few tests that none of the reasoners can handle (correctly) -- I could imagine an argument for leaving these out of the test suite, or at least having a separate category for such tests as we presumably aren't able to even guarantee what the expected result should be. Ian On 5 Jan 2009, at 22:10, Mike Smith wrote: > > I've updated [1] to contain nearly all of the WebOnt-description-logic > test cases, along with results of test runs on several DL reasoners > and propose them for adoption. With the exception of 7 test cases > which have display or export problems (for now in the list at [2]), > this means that all "Additional Description Logic Tests" from the OWL > tests cases [3] are ready for approval. > > -- > Mike Smith > > Clark & Parsia > http://clarkparsia.com/ > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Test_Queue > [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ > User:MikeSmith#Test_Cases_With_Problems > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#dL >
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2009 17:12:44 UTC