- From: pat hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 11:17:51 -0500
- To: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Pat: >[...] >> My action item >> >> 20030919#14 PatH To consider amendments to test cases >> concerning nonentailments >> >> was to suggest a form of words for describing what it >> means to pass a negative entailment test, right? >> Suggestion: >> >> "The test is considered to be passed if the entailment >> is <em>not</em> drawn using the rules of RDF-entailment >> or RDFS-entailment, as above." >> --> > > "The test is <em>failed</em> if the conclusion can be >> drawn from the premises using the rules of RDF- or >> RDFS-entailment. The test is considered to be >> <em>passed</em> when a thorough attempt to fail the > > test is unable to achieve failure." Alternative, maybe too long-winded (?) "The test is <em>failed</em> if the conclusion can be drawn from the premises using the rules of RDF- or RDFS-entailment. The test is considered to be <em>passed</em> when it can be conclusively demonstrated that the conclusion cannot be so drawn. In practice, the test may be considered to be passed when a thorough attempt to fail the test is unable to achieve failure." Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2003 12:19:15 UTC