- From: Polleres, Axel <axel.polleres@siemens.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:52:59 +0200
- To: "public-rdf-dawg@w3.org" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Hi, Since we only have one passing implementation so far, in order to be able to approve the entailment tests, I scanned them manually as per http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/implementations/#sparql11-entailment bind01 ... looks ok bind02 ... looks ok bind03 ... looks ok bind04 ... looks ok bind05 ... looks ok bind06 ... looks ok, but why do we need both bind06, and bind01 (seems the only diff is the select clause) bind07 ... don't understand, the bind07.srx file has no bindings for z at all. shouldn't this have for each ?o two entries, one binding z to o+1 and one to o+2?! bind08 ... looks ok lang ... looks ok, small remark: why is it called "lang" whereas the mf:name says "Literal lang test 2", I suppose because "lang test 1" is actually :plainLit? owlds01 ... loooks ok owlds02 ... loooks ok paper-sparqldl-Q1 ... looks ok, it would be nice to have an RDFS variant of thant one that does NOT return owl:Nothing, additionally. paper-sparqldl-Q2 ... looks ok ------------------------------------ Unfortunately, I didn't get to look further at the moment, since I have to run for a meeting now. If I get further before the TelCo, I'll continue here. best, Axel Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich CT RTC BAM CON-AT Siemensstraße 90 1210 Wien, Österreich Tel.: +43 51707-36983 Mobil: +43 664 88550859 mailto:axel.polleres@siemens.com Firma: Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Österreich; Rechtsform: Aktiengesellschaft; Firmensitz: Wien; Firmenbuchnummer: FN 60562 m; Firmenbuchgericht: Handelsgericht Wien; DVR: 0001708
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 12:53:30 UTC