- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 22 Nov 2002 12:04:17 -0600
- To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 10:47, Jan Grant wrote: > > The cross-datatype entailment test cases are reasonably clear cut, from > a mathematical point of view, I think. But Patrick raises a good point > when he asks (with a weather eye on implementation?) "what does it mean > to say that datatype X is supported?" > > > The intention with an entailment test case that's described as having > datatype support for DTs X, Y and Z is this: that to be able to run the > test case, you are able to decide: > > for any two datatyped literals, a and b, with the datatypes > of a and b coming from {X, Y, Z}, > > do a and b represent the same value? > > (You don't need to be able to work out what that value is; just to > answer that question.) Yes; that's a very good specification; please (1) put it in the manifest, ala <rdf:Description about="#datatypesEntailmentRules"> <rdfs:comment> An entailment test case that's described as having datatype support for DTs X, Y and Z is this: that to be able to run the test case, you are able to decide: for any two datatyped literals, a and b, with the datatypes of a and b coming from {X, Y, Z}, do a and b represent the same value? (You don't need to be able to work out what that value is; just to answer that question.) </rdfs:comment> <rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-mt-20021112/#dtype_interp"/> </rdf:Description> (2) say that in the tests WD somewhere too, and (3) point to it from the relevant tests; i.e. change <test:entailmentRules rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes#" /> to <test:entailmentRules rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/datatypes/Manifest#datatypesEntailmentRules" /> > Now, it might be better if the "datatype support" was recorded in the > test case manifest using a cons list; I don't think it's essential; i.e. there's no closed-world assumption that needs to be made explicit. datatype entialment is monotonic w.r.t. the number of datatypes you support; i.e. if G1 datatypes(dt1,dt2)-entials G2, then we know G1 datatypes(dt1,dt2,dt3)-entails G2. > I'm willing to take advice on > that, but that is what is meant by the manifest contents at this stage. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 13:04:20 UTC