Re: non-entailment test for imports (was Re: Proposed response to Golbeck regarding imports issue)

Ian
>At this point some may want to point out that Test doesn't say
>anything about entailment;

the first version of test said something about running the entailment tests.

As it became clear that the WG consensus was to define the consistency 
checkers, I concentrated the text around such artefacts, and left how to 
execute the entailment tests as an exercise for the reader. I regard that as 
an editorial decision, and would be happy to discuss it with anyone wishing 
to review that section of Test (Testing an OWL Implementation
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#running
contrast with
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-owl-test-20021024/#running
)


The LC draft does defer to S&AS concerning what is intended by entailment in 
an entailment test.
See e.g.
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#testEntailment
which links to
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-semantics-20030331/direct.html#direct_entails
and
http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-semantics-20030331/rdfs.html#rdfs_entails_Full

Jeremy

Received on Saturday, 21 June 2003 13:18:03 UTC