- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2003 07:34:18 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
The test cases overall manifest document (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/Manifest.rdf) is not what I expected at all. I expected a document containing information about the test cases. Instead, I found a very different document, at least for the first few hundred lines. The document contains, for example <Ontology rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl" dc:publisher="W3C" dc:date="2003-02-10" dc:format="text/xml" dc:language="en" dc:identifier="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl"> <versionInfo>March 18. 2003, GS</versionInfo> <imports rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema"/> <dc:title>Classes and properties for the Web Ontology Language OWL</dc:title> <dc:creator>W3C Web Ontology (WebOnt) Working Group</dc:creator> <dc:subject>OWL; Web Ontology Language; Semantic Web</dc:subject> <dc:description>This file specifies in RDF Schema format the built-in classes and properties that together form the basis of the RDF/XML syntax of OWL Full, OWL DL and OWL Lite with the help of RDF Schema. We do not expect people to import this file explcitly into their ontology. People that do import this file should expect their ontology to be an OWL Full ontology. </dc:description> </Ontology> What is this doing in a test cases manifest document? It should be removed. The document also contains <rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#InverseFunctionalProperty" rdfs:label="InverseFunctionalProperty"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property"/> <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl"/> </rdfs:Class> and similar stuff for most, if not all, of the OWL vocabulary. They all should be removed. The document also contains some data that looks as if it was generated from some typo somewhere. There is a namespace declaration for something that looks like an old version of the DC vocabulary namespace xmlns:j.0="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.0/" and <j.0:creator>Jos De Roo</j.0:creator> This should removed. The document is also sloppy with respect to RDFS classes and OWL classes. For example, <rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/testOntology#NotOwlFeatureTest"> <rdfs:comment> This is a negative test. The input document contains some use of the OWL namespace which is not a feature of OWL. These typically show DAML+OIL features that are not being carried forward into OWL. </rdfs:comment> <rdfs:subClassOf> <Restriction> <cardinality rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int" >1</cardinality> <onProperty rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/testSchema#inputDocument"/> </Restriction> </rdfs:subClassOf> </rdfs:Class> should be an OWL class.
Received on Saturday, 7 June 2003 07:34:26 UTC