W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2009

RE: how to test parsers?

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:54:52 +0200
Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0015DD85E@judith.fzi.de>
To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org]
>On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke
>Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:46 PM
>To: public-owl-wg@w3.org
>Subject: how to test parsers?
>How does one test an OWL parser?  We had some discussion about this, but
>I don't remember any conclusion.  If anyone knows of a good solution,
>I'd appreciate hearing about it.
>For example, a test case (WebOnt-Thing-003) says:
>  <owl:Class rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing">
>    <owl:equivalentClass rdf:resource
>       ="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Nothing"/>
>which owlapi (version 3, thanks Matthew!) converts to:
>    <EquivalentClasses>
>        <Class abbreviatedIRI="owlapi:Nothing"/>
>        <Class abbreviatedIRI="owlapi:Thing"/>
>    </EquivalentClasses>
>which my xslt converts back to:
>  <owl:Class rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Nothing">
>      <owl:equivalentClass>
>         <owl:Class rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing"/>
>      </owl:equivalentClass>
>   </owl:Class>
>Swapped the subject and object on equivalentClass and adding the triple
>{ owl:Nothing a owl:Class} are fine semantically, but it sure makes it
>hard to automate testing.  I guess one has to know the OWL semantics to
>know if the parser and serializer are correct.
>As I recall, we talked about this under the subject of parser/serializer
>conformance.  Maybe my best bet is to make sure the two ontologies each
>entail each other....  Is that good enough?  Is there anything simpler I
>can do?

I think, that's a sufficient but also a necessary approach, at least in
general (there may be special treatment for special scenarios). Remember the
round tripping criterion in the RDF Mapping:


for any OWL 2 DL ontology O, let G = T(O) be the RDF graph obtained by
transforming O as specified in Section 2, and let OG be the OWL 2 DL
ontology obtained by applying the reverse transformation from Section 3 to
G; then, O and OG are logically equivalent — that is, they have exactly the
same set of models.


Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
Research Scientist, Dept. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
Email: michael.schneider@fzi.de
WWW  : http://www.fzi.de/michael.schneider
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts, Az 14-0563.1, RP Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor,
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus

Received on Thursday, 30 July 2009 19:55:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:42:00 UTC