- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:22:22 +0200
- To: "Jeremy Carroll <jjc" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
I agree and found that we had some wrong entailments
in our implementation, which we now took out
(not changing the status quo we reported yesterday).
-- ,
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
PS If I'm not mistaken, in the description-logic tests
a consistency test is a negative entailment test
with conclusion
oiled:Satisfiable owl:equivalentClass owl:Nothing.
Right?
Can one do that in datalog?
Jeremy Carroll
<jjc@hpl.hp.com> To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Sent by: cc:
www-webont-wg-requ Subject: TEST agenda item
est@w3.org
2003-04-15 02:30
PM
I propose that test cardinality-005 be demoted from APPROVED to PROPOSED.
I would be happy for it to be a proposed non-entailment rather than a
proposed
entailment.
See:
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#cardinality-005
and
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2003Apr/0049.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2003Apr/0060.html
i.e the test as its stands is wrong in OWL Full, but too closely related to
tests that are right in OWL DL.
Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 19:22:37 UTC