- From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 20:15:06 +0000
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi all, I am just working my way through the test cases with our SPARQL 1.1 implementation (ARQ+HermiT to do OWL Direct Semantics entailment). One issue it that it would be very useful if we could mark test cases in general with the entailment regimes that can be used. In many cases, the query executed with and without entailment yields the same result, e.g., when testing aggregates or bind the BGP matching itself is usually trivial, and it would be very useful if we can then mark the test somehow as such. I.e., I would like to annotate tests as being ok also with an entailment regime if the use of entailment regime makes no difference to the results. The only problematic regime is OWL Direct Semantics, since the graphs have to be OWL DL conform, which requires an extra triple for the ontology header and declarations that identify a property as object or data property. This usually does not influence the results and we could make tests suitable also for OWL DL whenever that does not influence the results. Any support or objections for that? I would volunteer to extend the data and annotate the tests accordingly. As a result, we would have several of the normal tests annotated as also suitable for some ent. regime and the tests in the entailment folder as those that really require entailment to get the right results. I am also wondering why the tests in the entailment folder use a slightly different marking than what is described in the http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/README.html The above uses: :rdf01 rdf:type mf:QueryEvaluationTest ; mf:name "RDF inference test" ; dawgt:approval dawgt:NotClassified ; mf:action [ qt:query <rdf01.rq> ; qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ] ; mf:result <rdf01.srx> . The manifest in the entailment folder uses: :rdf01 rdf:type mf:QueryEvaluationTest ; mf:name "RDF inference test" ; dawgt:approval dawgt:NotClassified ; sd:entailmentRegime ent:RDF ; mf:action [ qt:query <rdf01.rq> ; qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ] ; mf:result <rdf01.srx> . Which one did we decide on? In order to annotate existing non-entailment tests as also applicable under an entailment regime, how about annotating them with a list of applicable regimes? For example, :rdf01 rdf:type mf:QueryEvaluationTest ; mf:name "RDF inference test" ; dawgt:approval dawgt:NotClassified ; sd:entailmentRegime ( ent:RDF ent:RDFS ) ; mf:action [ qt:query <rdf01.rq> ; qt:data <rdf01.ttl> ] ; mf:result <rdf01.srx> . This would then indicate that the test can be executed with RDF and RDFS entailment? It might then even be clearer to not abuse the sd:entailmentRegime property and instead use something like mf:applicableWith. Birte -- Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 309 Computing Laboratory Parks Road Oxford OX1 3QD United Kingdom +44 (0)1865 283520
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 20:15:39 UTC