- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 03:29:29 -0400 (EDT)
- To: sandro@w3.org
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: done: test results ontology
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 16:53:35 -0400
>
>
> I've written up what I have for the test results ontology, completing
> an action item from last week's meeting:
> http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/resultsOntology
>
> suggestions welcome, of course.
>
> -- sandro
A few comments and a question.
I suggest not using rdf:parsetype="Literal" - instead use xsd:string.
I suggest not limiting the output of a test run to be a document. It is
entirely possible that the output of a test run is a fragment of a
document, or some other kind of entitity.
I suggest ensuring that the ontology is in OWL Lite. I think that the only
reason that the ontology is not in OWL Lite is that
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Document is not an OWL class.
./owlParse http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/resultsOntology
Reading http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/resultsOntology
Fatal error: exception Owl.Syntax("Non-class uri for description: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Document>
")
It is not possible to correctly use xsd:duration in OWL (and RDF) as the
value space for xsd:duration is not well-defined. This is only mentioned
in a comment, but I suggest that even this use is not appropriate.
There is a mixture of rdf:about and rdf:ID in the document. I suggest
moving entirely to rdf:about - strictly to prevent accidental occurrence of
two rdf:ID for the same name causing an RDF syntax error.
How does one report success in passing the syntax part of a test?
peter
Received on Friday, 12 September 2003 03:29:52 UTC