- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:54:52 +0200
- To: "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <0EF30CAA69519C4CB91D01481AEA06A0015DD85E@judith.fzi.de>
>-----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: <http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Mapping_to_RDF_Graphs#Introduction_and_Prel iminaries> [[ 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. ]] Cheers, Michael -- 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