Re: QAF Ops Guidelines review action [LONG]

>             As an example we apply this to one line in the central OWL 
> document (Semantics and Abstract Syntax) i.e. the definition of unionOf in
> The clear if somewhat mathematical definition becomes the following text:
> [[
> If x is in the interpretation of unionOf(c1 ... cn) then there MUST be some 
> i such that x is in the interpretation of ci. If x is in the interpretation 
> of ci then x MUST be in the interpretation of unionOf(c1 ... cn).
> ]]
> (Note the two MUSTs are separately testable).
> Doing that a hundred times over would have made the document unreadable, 
> for the relatively minor advantage of being able to quantify the coverage 
> of the specification by the test suite, and to better link each test to the 
> aspect of the specification that it was trying to explore. 

I don't understand the "hundred times over" aspect to this.  Is it
because of "c1 ... cn", or because unionOf is only one of many parts
of OWL, or something else?

      -- sandro

Received on Wednesday, 17 December 2003 06:49:20 UTC