- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 10:10:20 +0300
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Peter: > I still don't see any particular rationale to forbid loops in > equivalentClass, I am not particularly arguing for forbidding, more saying that I currently believe that's what S&AS says - but it is not very clear. I've created a test with a loop and mark it as in DL. Maybe the test would be sufficient clarification of the S&AS text - this is somewhat of a tiny corner case. New tests added: I5.26-009 with an owl:equivalentClass loop - DL I5.26-010 like I5.26-009 but without the owl:equivalentClass triple. This creates an orphan, which was not already tested for. The orphan is in DL. disjointWith-010 With an owl:disjointWith loop, hence in Full I also renamed the unnamed individual cycle I5.26-008 as I6.1-001 since the issue I6.1-UnnamedIndividualRestrictions specifically mentions this test case. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I6.1-UnnamedIndividualRestrictions The new editors draft will be in place soon. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2003 04:10:30 UTC