- From: Stella Mitchell <stellamit@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:31:24 -0400
- To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 12:32:04 UTC
Thanks for the comments. On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote: > > I was surprised to read in Test: > > Note that while ideally the RIF consumer would be able to > conclusively demonstrate that the conclusion cannot be drawn from the > premises, in practice a failure to draw the conclusion after a > thorough attempt to do so can be considered a successful outcome. > > Is this based on a WG decision I'm forgetting? If so, I apologize. > > My sense right now is that this isn't okay. To determine a negative > I removed that sentence. > Maybe in test-results-reporting we can allow for a 'nearly-passed' or > 'weak pass', to give some sort of partial credit. Really, these folks > just got lucky. > > In OWL 1, a system was supposed to report this as 'undecided'. That's > better than failing (deciding, but deciding incorrectly), and probably > better than not reporting any result, but still not as good as a 'pass'. > > I still like that solution. > I changed 'unknown' to 'undecided' in the result description. Stella
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 12:32:04 UTC