RE: WOWG: Proposed test cases for qualified cardinality constraints

Big difference between Deb's tests and the three I am proposing for today is
that Deb's tests actually test cardinality constraints!

Mine simply say we don't do the qualified sort.

Jeremy


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-webont-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Deborah McGuinness
> Sent: 17 April 2002 16:40
> To: Jeremy Carroll
> Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: WOWG: Proposed test cases for qualified cardinality
> constraints
>
>
> just a reminder - we wrote an example test suite in daml+oil that
> just addressed cardinality.
> it is up on the daml ontology library - http://www.daml.org/ontologies/114
>
> they may be useful in the test suite generation work on cardinality.
>
> deborah
>
> Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
> > I attach test cases for the qualified cardinality constraints
> which we have
> > agreed are not part of OWL.
> >
> > I ask that the chairs schedule time in a telecon to discuss the
> following
> > proposal:
> >
> > I propose:
> >
> > [[[
> >
> > The WebOnt WG:
> > - approves the error test cases showing that qualified cardinality
> > constraints are not part of OWL.
> > - actions Dan Connolly to arrange a test repository on the
> http://www.w3.org
> > site
> > - actions Dan Connolly to arrange direct CVS access for
> appropriate members
> > of the test focus area to that repository
> > - actions Jeremy Carroll to update the repository to include
> the approved
> > qualified cardinality constraint test cases.
> >
> > Moreover, the WG assigns to the test focus area responsibility for
> > maintaining the approved test cases in light of future changes
> made to OWL
> > by the WG (for example, the assignment of an appropriate namespace).
> >
> > ]]]
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> > For convenience I show error001.owl inline here, with a blow-by-blow
> > breakdown (in **s):
> >
> > ***START BOILER PLATE***
> > <?xml version="1.0"?>
> >
> > <!--
> >   Copyright World Wide Web Consortium, (Massachusetts Institute of
> >   Technology, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en
> >   Automatique, Keio University).
> >
> >   All Rights Reserved.
> >
> >   Please see the full Copyright clause at
> >   <http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-software.html>
> >
> > ***END BOILER PLATE***
> >   Description: A DAML+OIL qualified cardinality constraint is not
> >                legal OWL.
> >   Author: Jeremy Carroll (jjc@hpl.hp.com)
> >
> > -->
> >
> > *** For now we use the DAML+OIL namespace,
> >    this is separated out here for easy maintenance
> >    when the WG agrees on the OWL namespace URI.
> >    Of course, this means that right now this test case
> >    is actually false. This is a legal DAML+OIL document!
> > ***
> > <!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF
> >
> >    <!ENTITY owl "http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil#">
> > ]>
> >
> > <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> >          xmlns:eg="http://example.org/"
> >          xmlns:owl="&owl;"
> >     >
> >
> > *** A minimal example, that is legal DAML+OIL but not legal OWL. ***
> >
> >    <owl:Restriction owl:cardinalityQ="1">
> >       <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#exampleProp"/>
> >       <owl:hasClassQ rdf:resource="#exampleClass"/>
> >    </owl:Restriction>
> >
> > </rdf:RDF>
> >
> > *** END ***
> >
> > error002 is just like error001 but with a max cardinality constraint.
> > error003 is just like error001 but with a min cardinality constraint.
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >                                             Name:
> qualified-cardinality-constraints.zip
> >    qualified-cardinality-constraints.zip    Type: Zip
> Compressed Data (application/x-zip-compressed)
> >                                         Encoding: base64
>
> --
>  Deborah L. McGuinness
>  Knowledge Systems Laboratory
>  Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
>  Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
>  email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
>  URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
>  (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer
> fax)  801 705 0941
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 04:39:17 UTC