W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > December 2013

Re: RDF 1.1 Semantics Implementation Report on the Swertia RDF-Based Reasoner

From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 22:41:00 +0100
Message-ID: <52A638EC.5070608@fzi.de>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
CC: "public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Hi Gregg,

thanks for pointing to this. I will have a look at it. I have never used 
Ruby, but can usually read sourcecode in any new programming language 
sufficiently well to get the basic ideas from it.


Am 09.12.2013 01:09, schrieb Gregg Kellogg:
> On Dec 8, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de> wrote:
>> Dear Working Group!
>> Today, I wanted to do all the testing for my reasoner
>> and was ready to spend half the day with this activity.
>> Unfortunately, I found that this is not as easy as I
>> thought.
>> The procedure would be to first parse a "manifest.ttl" file
>> into an RDF graph, get all the metadata and links to test
>> files from it, find out the sort of test case
>> (positive/negative entailment/satisfiability test),
>> call the reasoner with pointers to the files from the
>> manifest, telling the file type (yes, the test files
>> really exist in different serialization formats!),
>> collecting the result value, of course, checking for
>> processing errors or timeouts, and finally building
>> up the singular EARL RDF graphs and the complete result
>> graph with the project-specific metadata.
>> Now, that's a lot of stuff to implement (and to understand
>> in the first place), and most of it is totally generic for
>> any reasoning tool used with the RDF 1.1 test suite,
>> and much of it, such as the particular manifest file or EARL
>> format, should not even be of interest to the tool provider.
>> What I would like to have is a tool that does all the testing
>> and just calls the reasoner with a defined input/output
>> behaviour, such that all I have to implement additionally
>> is a thin wrapper around my reasoner that handles this
>> input/output behaviour.
>> Is there such a tool, and I have only missed this?
> I don't know of a standard tool to do precisely what you're asking for, but I implement a common pattern among my RDF serialization testers. For example, in <https://github.com/ruby-rdf/rdf-turtle>, where I have spec/suite_helper.rb and spec/suite_spec.rb, which parse the manifest and provide helpers for each test there. Extending this to work for the semantics suite should be fairly straight-forward, if you have some familiarity with Ruby. I suspect that other systems (such as Jena) have similar infrastructures for running tests.
> There's also a similar tool for the RDFa test suite: <https://github.com/rdfa/rdfa-website/>, which provides a wrapper to call out to different executables to perform an RDFa transformation and tests the results (see bin/run_suite).
> Performing timeouts was beyond the scope of these tools, but would be straight-forward.
> If any of these can be of help to you, you're welcome to them; all my code is public-domain.
> Gregg
>> The proposed I/O protocol for the reasoner (wrapped-into-a-command-line-tool) would be:
>>   Input parameters:
>>   * input file name 1
>>   * input file serialization 1
>>   * input file name 2 (only for entailment checks)
>>   * input file serialization 2 (only for entailment checks)
>>   Output (on stdout): TRUE | FALSE | ERROR
>> The testing tool itself would be responsible for checking for
>> timeouts and unhandled errors (other than those indicated
>> by "ERROR" by the tool itself), and would be called with
>> following input parameters:
>>   * project metadata file name (see below)
>>   * testdata folder name (which includes the "manifest.ttl" file)
>>   * output file name
>>   * timeout (in seconds)
>>   * reasoner file name (the executable)
>> The project metadata file would have to be created by the
>> reasoner provider and would contain the fixed metadata
>> from which the result EARL file is being created, both the
>> metadata for the whole test run as well as the fixed metadata
>> for each singular test result. This metadata includes
>> the project URI, developer, etc. The appropriate format
>> may be RDF or a key=value format, or whatever.
>> If no such tool exists or is being created by the WG,
>> I have to do this myself, which will delay things further,
>> I'm afraid.
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>> Am 04.12.2013 18:25, schrieb Peter F. Patel-Schneider:
>>> Hi Michael
>>> The RDF 1.1 entailment tests have been changed a bit, to conform better
>>> to what RDF systems to.
>>> When you run the tests, could you make sure that you have an up to date
>>> set?
>>> Thanks,
>>> peter
>>> On 12/02/2013 03:20 PM, Michael Schneider wrote:
>>>> Dear Working Group,
>>>> please find below my implementation report for my experimental Swertia
>>>> RDF-Based Reasoner, a system that tries to be a close implementation
>>>> of the model-theoretic semantics of RDF (unlike the many existing
>>>> systems that are more based on the RDF entailment rules). I still
>>>> wasn't able to run the official RDF 1.1 tests, due to lack of time. I
>>>> also believe that the result for the test suite will not become very
>>>> good, as many of the tests are about datatype reasoning, which is not
>>>> supported by my system. Anyway, I still plan to run the tests, as soon
>>>> I find the time, and also plan to provide the results and the
>>>> prototypical system, but for now I provide you with my implementation
>>>> experiences only. I hope this will already be useful for the Working
>>>> Group.
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Michael
Received on Monday, 9 December 2013 21:41:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:59:44 UTC