- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 12:35:47 +0300
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
I have updated the TEST editors draft as indicated at the telecon: Latest version, ready for review by Ian and Pat (and anyone else) is: http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/ the changes are listed in http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/changes I here expand on the most recent part of that list, and quote the changed text concerning datatypes at the bottom. approval of tests ============= manifests changed, document regenerated with approved tests in new sections. Some old sections vanished completely, since all the tests in those sections have been approved. s/decisive/complete [and terminating]/ ============================== delete complete DL conformance clause ================================ and some consequential changes (there were more, 3 or 4, than I expected, but nothing non-editorial). other ==== description-logic tests 503 and 504 were mistakenly included in the nonnormative L version; I have changed so that they are excluded from L like 501 and 502 (All the tests appear in the normative compound doc, and the informative XXL version) fix datatypes ========== This impacts a number of sections, first summary then detail. document conformance =================== consistent documents are with respect to datatype theory consistency checker ================== soundness w.r.t. datatype theory; complete and terminating independent of datatype theory; reordering of clauses to put datatype theory documentation first; MAY report unsupported datatype; old clause about MUST report Unknown deleted wordsmithing test types ======= added ", or are not," to show that tests may list datatypes that must not be supported; wordsmithed manifest format ============ new property otest:notSupportedDatatype used in manifest running the tests ============= added dfn for "appropriate datatype support", wordsmithing new datatype test =============== I5.8-012 duplicate of I5.8-003 new xmlliteral tests miscellaneous-204 and miscellaneous-205 for connolly's action DETAIL OF DATATYPES: document conformance =================== http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/#consistencyConformance [[ An OWL document is consistent with respect to a datatype theory [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax], if and only if there exists some model of the document that is consistent with the constraints specified by the relevant model theory (see [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax]: OWL Lite and OWL DL, OWL Full). ]] consistency checker ================== http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/#consistencyChecker soundness w.r.t. datatype theory; complete and terminating independent of datatype theory; reordering of clauses to put datatype theory documentation first; MAY report unsupported datatype; old clause about MUST report Unknown deleted changes are **** [[ An OWL consistency checker takes a document as input, and returns one word being Consistent, Inconsistent, or Unknown. An OWL consistency checker SHOULD report network errors occurring during the computation of the imports closure. **Moved forward**An OWL consistency checker MUST provide a means to determine the datatypes supported by its datatype theory, [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax]; for example, by listing them in its supporting documentation. **** **An OWL consistency checker MUST be sound: it MUST return Consistent only when the input document is consistent and Inconsistent only when the input document is not consistent, with respect to the datatype theory of the checker. ** **If an input document uses datatypes that are not supported by the datatype theory of an OWL consistency checker then it MAY report a warning. ** **An OWL consistency checker is complete and terminating, if, given sufficient (but finite) resources (CPU cycles and memory) and the absence of network errors, it will always return either Consistent or Inconsistent. ** It has been shown that for OWL Lite and DL it is possible to construct a complete and terminating consistency checker (the languages are decidable), and that for OWL full it is not possible to construct a complete and terminating consistency checker (the language is undecidable, [Practical Reasoning]). The datatype theory of an OWL consistency checker MUST minimally support at least xsd:integer, xsd:string from [XML Schema Datatypes]. An OWL consistency checker SHOULD NOT return Unknown. Unknown, while sometimes needed, is not a desired response. Four different conformance classes of OWL consistency checker are defined. An OWL Lite consistency checker is an OWL consistency checker that takes an OWL Lite document as input. An OWL DL consistency checker is an OWL consistency checker that takes an OWL DL document as input. An OWL Full consistency checker is an OWL consistency checker that takes an OWL Full document as input. A complete OWL Lite consistency checker is an OWL Lite consistency checker that is complete and terminating. Note: Every OWL Full consistency checker is also an OWL DL consistency checker. Every OWL DL consistency checker is also an OWL Lite consistency checker. The different levels are intended to be used to indicate the intended domain of a consistency checker. Note: A complete OWL Lite consistency checker MAY return Unknown for an OWL Lite document in the case where a resource limit has been exceeded. ]] test types ======= [[ Some of the tests require that certain datatypes are **, or are not, ** supported in the datatype theory [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax]. These are indicated with the test. Other datatypes which are used in the test are also indicated: the test applies whether or not these are supported in the datatype theory . The datatypes xsd:integer, xsd:string from [XML Schema Datatypes] are not indicated, even when used or required, since they must be supported. ]] manifest format ============ [[ The datatypes used in the test are given with the otest:usedDatatype property or with one of its subproperties: otest:supportedDatatype or otest:notSupportedDatatype. These indicate that the test is only valid when the datatype is supported or not supported respectively by the datatype theory being used. ]] running the tests ============= [[ An OWL consistency checker can be tested using appropriate consistency and inconsistency tests. Appropriate tests are those of an appropriate level and for which the checker has appropriate datatype support. An OWL consistency checker has appropriate datatype support for a test if both: + Its datatype theory, [OWL Semantics and Abstract Syntax] supports all the datatypes that are required to be supported by the test. + If there are any datatypes that are required to be not supported by the test then at least one of them is not supported by the datatype theory of the checker. An OWL Lite consistency checker with appropriate datatype support, when presented with a file from an OWL Lite consistency test, must return Consistent or Unknown. etc. ]] new datatype test =============== I5.8-012 duplicate of I5.8-003 http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByIssue#I5.8-012 [[ DL // Consistent document. Description: (informative) There might be only 128 different values of xsd:byte that are also xsd:unsignedInt; but this does not follow from the datatype theory of this test. (cf. the similar inconsistency test). Datatypes that must not be supported: xsd:byte, xsd:unsignedInt, ]] this is the test discussed at the telecon, which duplicates http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposedByIssue#I5.8-003 [[ DL // Inconsistent document. Description: (informative) There are only 128 different values of xsd:byte that are also xsd:unsignedInt. Required datatype support: xsd:byte, xsd:unsignedInt, ]] new xmlliteral tests miscellaneous-204 and miscellaneous-205 for connolly's action these are similary identical except for the metadata (the test has embedded XHTML inside the RDF). http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposed-misc-200-xmlliteral#miscellaneous-204 [[ Lite // Inconsistent document. Description: (informative) This shows a simple inconsistency depending on the datatype rdf:XMLLiteral. This file is inconsistent with a datatype theory which supports rdf:XMLLiteral, and consistent otherwise. Required datatype support: rdf:XMLLiteral, ]] http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/proposed-misc-200-xmlliteral#miscellaneous-205 [[ Lite // Consistent document. Description: (informative) This shows that an OWL consistency checker which does not support the datatype rdf:XMLLiteral should not detect inconsistencies depending on it. This file is inconsistent with a datatype theory which supports rdf:XMLLiteral, but consistent in this test, which excludes such support. Datatypes that must not be supported: rdf:XMLLiteral, ]] I hope this is right. Changes I am still expecting to make are: - incorporate reviewer & WG feedback on this e-mail - add date for end of last call - anything the pubrules checker throws at me Jeremy
Received on Friday, 16 May 2003 06:35:40 UTC