- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:32:34 +0200
- To: Stella Mitchell <cleo@us.ibm.com>
- CC: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <48BB9A92.9010909@inf.unibz.it>
I split up the test case. Best, Jos Stella Mitchell wrote: > > On this one [1], is the And in the conclusion an essential part > of the test, or a convenience to represent three separate > things that are entailed by the ruleset&data? If it's the latter, > then having three tests each with one of the conjuncts as > the conclusion, would make better tests, because if it > fails they know more precisely what didn't work. (Though > as it is currently, it may be better as an illustration for a human > reader since they can see all 3 at a glance -- so the choice depends > on the main motivation for the tests). > > Stella > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence > > > > > *Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>* > Sent by: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org > > 08/27/2008 12:04 PM > > > To > RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org> > cc > > Subject > RDF and OWL test cases > > > > > > > > > I added some test cases concerned with RDF and owl. I improvised a > little when writing the RDF graphs. Let me know if its okay. > > RDF: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RDF_Combination_Constant_Equivalence_Graph_Entailment > > OWL DL: > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Annotation_Entailment > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Non-Annotation_Entailment > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Individual-Data_Separation_Inconsistency > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWL_Combination_Vocabulary_Separation_Inconsistency > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/OWL_Combination_Vocabulary_Separation_Inconsistency_II > -- > 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 > -- 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 Monday, 1 September 2008 07:32:18 UTC