- From: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 08:43:54 -0400
- To: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF96AA86F5.8ABB72E8-ON852574EB.0045E4AE-852574EB.0045F009@us.ibm.com>
Oh, I see - the BLD spec does define logical entailment of a document (as well as other) formula by a document formula, but for conformance it considers only entailment of closed condition formulas. The way the BLD conformance clause is currently written, it only defines conformance for existentially quantified condition formulas, so I think it needs to be reworded a little? Stella Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it> 10/23/2008 04:37 AM To Stella Mitchell/Watson/IBM@IBMUS cc public-rif-wg@w3.org Subject Re: [RIF] test case conclusions I'd say that conclusion should *never* be a document formulas, for two reasons: - BLD defines conformance only for entailment of condition formulas; not document formulas - things should be kept simple, i.e., all test cases should use the same format, and many condition formulas (e.g., those containing quantifiers and/or disjunction) cannot be expressed as document formulas Best, Jos Stella Mitchell wrote: > > In the existing set of tests, a few of the conclusions need** to be > condition formulas (eg [1]), none of them need to be document > formulas, and by far most of them can be either. Do we want to have > a style convention that says they should be conditions if they can, > and documents only if they need to be (or the reverse)? Or just leave > it to the preference of the submitter? > > Stella > > [1] > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Disjunctive_Information_from_Negative_Guards_1 > > > **although, couldn't those that entail non-atomic conditions also be > be represented as: > premises: > .... > ... > > test:passed() :- Or (... ) > > conclusion: > Document ( > Group ( > test:passed() > ) > ) > > (it's not as readable for a human, I think) -- Jos de Bruijn debruijn@inf.unibz.it +390471016224 http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- No one who cannot rejoice in the discovery of his own mistakes deserves to be called a scholar. - Donald Foster
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2008 12:44:55 UTC