- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:52:59 +0000
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 06:50 PM 11/22/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >Are the test cases primarily, tests for implementors; or are they primarily >tests about our language. There were some words in Concepts that tried to address this in the case of entailments: http://www.ninebynine.org/wip/RDF-concepts/2002-11-05/rdf-concepts.html#section-Entailment I see this is not in the latest working version. Probably that's fine; just pointing out. Are the words any use for the test case draft? #g -- At 06:50 PM 11/22/02 +0100, Jeremy Carroll 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?" >]] > >Are the test cases primarily, tests for implementors; or are they primarily >tests about our language. > >I think the latter, and implementors have to piggy back. > >Thus the schema defintions could read: > > ><rdf:Property> > rdf:about="&testns;datatypeSupport"> > <rdfs:comment>The subject of this triple is >of type test:PositiveEntailmentTest or test:NegativeEntailmentTest, >in which the entailment is >a datatype entailment. >In terms of http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#dtype_interp >this reflects a D-entailment, where the datatype described by >the object of this triple is a member of the set D of recognized datatypes. > </rdfs:comment> ></rdf:Property> > > <rdfs:Class rdf:about="&testns;PositiveEntailmentTest"> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Positive Entailment Test</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">These tests are specified by one or more >premise documents (in RDF/XML or N-Triples) together with a single >conclusion document. >The premise files together entail the conclusion document, as specified >by the RDF Semantics; where the type of entailment >(e.g. simple entailment or RDFS-entailment) is as specified > by test:entailmentRules and test:datatypeSupport properties. ></rdfs:comment> > <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="&testns;"/> > </rdfs:Class> > > > <rdfs:Class rdf:about="&testns;NegativeEntailmentTest"> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Negative Entailment Test</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">These tests are specified by one or more >premise documents (in RDF/XML or N-Triples) together with a single >conclusion document. >The premise files together do not entail the conclusion document, as >specified >by the RDF Semantics; where the type of entailment >(e.g. simple entailment or RDFS-entailment) is as specified > by test:entailmentRules and test:datatypeSupport properties. ></rdfs:comment> > <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="&testns;"/> > </rdfs:Class> > > >==== > >The idea is that the definition in testSchema.rdf lead one to think about >the formal recommendation and what it says, rather than what an implementor >must or must not do. >(Which is a topic we have tried to avoid!) > >Thus, we do not answer Patrick's question. > >Jeremy ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 25 November 2002 09:36:10 UTC