W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > May 2008

Re: test cases on wiki

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 15:26:38 +0100
Message-Id: <E3FA2BC9-E228-49C5-B083-81BDE93B53BC@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>

On 21 May 2008, at 15:06, Ian Horrocks wrote:

> On 19 May 2008, at 16:34, Bijan Parsia wrote:
>> Writing test cases really really sucks, by the by.
> Can you say a little more about what the problems are and how you  
> think they might be addressed?

Sure. There's lots of axis (expressivity, kind of test, granularity  
etc.) of metadata and a lot of metadata that isn't obvious outside  
some arbitrary decisions (e.g., naming the test case, providing a  
description). To convert my table of different bnode semantics and  
their effects would require a pretty large effort and up to twelve  
wiki pages (and it's weird, can I use the same test case to cover the  
cases where both results are identical under either semantics? should  
I only produce a test case for the situations where they differ?)

Some of it is the wiki; some of it is the difficulty of putting  
together a nice framework; and some of it is that writing test cases  
is inherently hard.

>> I strongly request of the chairs that we do something to move this  
>> forward. Test cases written in a crunch at the end are going to be  
>> painful to do and hard to validate. I suggest that we actually put  
>> some people in charge of doing this.
> We are on to it.


>> I am not one of those people!
> Agreed.

Even greater!

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2008 14:24:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:04 UTC