W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: RDB2RDF - Test cases naming convention

From: Robert Scanlon <rscanlon@revelytix.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 09:08:04 -0500
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=RTm1wxum2+sSitLWU5UKAUgGokA@mail.gmail.com>
To: bvillazon@fi.upm.es
Cc: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>, David McNeil <dmcneil@revelytix.com>, rdb2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi Boris,

I wasn't in the telecon, but gathered some of the discussion from David.
 Not sure where you all ended up, but here's what I had been suggesting
earlier as a point of reference, with the example you requested below.

   1. use an explicit short, sortable unique identifier for databases
   (schemas or 'data sets')
      - e.g., D000, D001, D002, etc
   2. use a short, consistent, scalable identifier for mappings
      - e.g., G000, G001 etc for direct graphs; R000, R001, etc for r2rml
   3. use a combination of these for test case identification (mostly for
   referencing in docs, conversations, and bugs)
      - e.g., TC000-G000, TC000-R000, TC000-R001, etc if we want a different
      prefix (TC) for test cases, or
      - e.g., D000-G000, D000-R000, D000-R001, etc if we simply want to
      concatenate the database and map IDs

So an example organizational structure might be (note IDs are shown
uppercased, but filenames should be lowercased):

*D000 *- Simple 1 table, 1 column database; empty.
    TC000-G000 - Direct graph   - Map *G000 *- Files: map_g000.ttl, ...
    TC000-R000 - <description> - Map *R000 *- Files: map_r000.ttl, ...
    TC000-R001 - <description> - Map *R001 *- Files: map_r001.ttl, ...
*D001 *- Simple 1 table, 1 column database; 1 record.
    TC001-G000 - Direct graph   - Map *G000 *- Files: map_g000.ttl, ...
    TC001-R000 - <description> - Map *R000 *- Files: map_r000.ttl, ...
    TC001-R001 - <description> - Map *R001 *-  Files: map_r001.ttl, ...
*D002 *- Simple 1 table, 2 columns database; 1 record.
    TC002-G000 - Direct graph   - Map *G000 *- Files: map_g000.ttl, ...
    TC002-R000 - <description> - Map *R000* - Files: map_r000.ttl, ...
    TC002-R001 - <description> - Map *R001 *- Files: map_r001.ttl, ...
    TC002-R002 - <description> - Map *R002* - Files: map_r002.ttl, ...
    TC002-R003 - <description> - Map *R003 *- Files: map_r003.ttl, ...

There's a lot of variations of the above that could be employed, but the
general theme is consistency, scalability, and sort-order that can be
aligned with the presentation in the docs.  Note each identifier should be
accompanied by a short name (like the current database identifiers) and
short readable description, so we can list tests at each level by ID, Name,
and Description.


On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Boris Villazón Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es
> wrote:

> Hi Eric, Robert, David, all
> Last telcon we were discussing about the test cases naming convention.
> As far as I remember we agreed-on the names should be descriptive and start
> with a letter.
> However Robert/David suggest also the possibility to order the test cases
> alphanumeric. is this correct?
> would you please point out an example?
> Sorry if I'm asking this again
> Thanks in advance
> Boris
Received on Monday, 4 April 2011 14:08:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:23 UTC