- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 13:17:48 +0200
- To: "Sean Bechhofer <seanb" <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org, www-webont-wg-request@w3.org
[clear account; quick question before our visitors arrive...]
how do you test a non-entailment test
ie P not-entails C
--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Sean Bechhofer
<seanb@cs.man.ac.u To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
k> cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Sent by: Subject: Re: OWL DL in RDF
www-webont-wg-requ
est@w3.org
2003-05-29 12:57
PM
On Thu, 29 May 2003, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
>
> Sean Bechhofer wrote:
>
> >
> > In the process of documenting my implementations, I have produced the
> > following:
> >
> > http://wonderweb.man.ac.uk/owl/rdf.shtml
>
>
> I glanced at this and thought it was pretty good, distinctly more
readable
> than the stuff I produce. There were one or two technical mistakes, I can
> give a detailed review if the group wants (e.g. owl:equivalentClass
> inadequately handled).
This would certainly be useful for me.
> We perhaps need to have consensus on which technical changes we are
making
> to OWL, since they tend to show up in this sort of document.
>
> I think with this appraoch we are unlikely to get everything 100% spot
on,
> so it would be good to have this in a document either which is updatable
or
> with an errata page so we can fix it into the future.
Indeed.
Sean
--
Sean Bechhofer
seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2003 07:18:00 UTC