- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 16:37:35 -0500
- To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
I integrated some (all?) of the recent reports into the implementation report; in particular, I made some links from the exit criteria to the systems that look like they meet the criteria. It's really great to see this implementation experience roll in. Keep up the sharp eyes on the test cases and such. If I left anything out, please let me know: [[ Exit Criteria When the Working Group requested CR, it suggested the following conditions met before proceeding on to PR. In terms of W3C Process, this is the immediate implementation goal, but of course the real goal is to have available lots of excellent, interoperable, and downright useful OWL systems. These criteria are reproduced here so they can be linked to appropriate implementations as they emerge. 1. finish resolving dependency on RDF Core specs, esp. RDF Semantics @@note Sep RDF WDs 2. two complete OWL Lite consistency checkers (i.e. 2 which pass almost all OWL Lite consistency and inconsistency tests and moreover claim logical completeness) candidates include Pellet above 3. Each test (except the extra credit tests) is demonstrated to be passed by some implementation stay tuned to OWL test case results 4. two reasoners implementing (different) substantial subsets of OWL DL candidates include FaCT, Racer, Cerebra 5. two reasoners implementing useful subsets of OWL Full and passing at least 80% of the postive entailment tests Candidates include Euler, Jena, and surnia 6. two owl syntax checkers passing all tests candidates include Cerebra, OWLP, OWL validator above ]] -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/impls#exit -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2003 17:37:46 UTC