W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: propose - approve tests

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:24:51 +0100
Message-ID: <462E2143.6030208@hpl.hp.com>
To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>



> rationale and test results to follow.

The rationale is essentially that:
a) we have some evidence that the tests are correct
b) for the purposes of last call, Dan suggests we should move forward 
with approved tests only. This means that we can choose between:
    - not going to LC
    - or for each test
         - approve it
      or
         - reject it
c) there are four tests that I propose to approve that are not passed by 
Jena these are:
N/A:  #embedded-rdf7
N/A:  #loopx #loopx1 #loopx3
Jena did pass #embedded-rdf7-alt  (for XSLT 2.0 systems) and #loopx2
I will send separate messages about these.
d) the base tests are particular confusing.
    I was still debugging them an hour ago, both the implementation and 
the test cases.
e) I suggest we include status of this document text, specifically 
reflecting what we believe about the tests, e.g.
[[
The GRDDL Working Group believe that the tests listed in this document
correctly reflect the GRDDL Specification.
However, prior to the call for implementations, we have had
only limited implementer feedback, mainly concerning the
tests that were listed also in the previous working draft.
Thus we welcome implementer feedback both as to their success
in implementing the specification, and as to any errors in,
or discussion concerning, these tests.
In particular, the tests involving xml:base, html:base
and URL redirects are tricky.
]]


I will separate out different proposals for different groups of tests.

Jeremy





-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 15:25:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:49 GMT