- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:54:14 +0000
- To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: RDF core WG <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 02:13 PM 12/13/02 +0000, Jan Grant wrote: >On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Graham Klyne wrote: > > > > > I was trying to check a test case to confirm something in > > Concepts/Semantics docs, and found that: > > > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xmllang/Manifest.rdf > > > > returned an HTTP 403/Forbidden error page. > > > > Also: > > > > re: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xmllang/test003.rdf > > The comment is misleading - there is no xml:lang - though the test is OK, I > > think. > > > > Do we have any entailment tests dealing with language-tagged plain > literals? > > > > E.g. > > > > 1. > > > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat" . > > ?entails? > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@fr . > > > > 2. > > > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@en . > > ?entails? > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat" . > > > > 3. > > > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@en . > > ?entails? > > ex:subject ex:prop "chat"@fr . > > > > I think the answer is no in each case, and that would be in agreement with > > my readiong of the docs. > > Should these be negative entailment test cases? > >For historical reasons (they were done at the same time as the related >DT entailments involving language), see: > >http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest.rdf#language-important-for-non-dt-entailment-1 Thanks... Er, those test cases seem to deal with datatyped literals. My question was with respect to plain literals. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 13 December 2002 15:32:58 UTC