- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 18:49:40 -0800
- To: David Robillard <d@drobilla.net>
- Cc: "public-rdf-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
I think UNTESTED is just fine; it's not necessary to show interoperability, as that has already been done. Perhaps EARL should have a category for "willfully skipped this test in protest" :) Gregg Kellogg Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 26, 2013, at 6:09 PM, David Robillard <d@drobilla.net> wrote: > >> On Thu, 2013-12-26 at 10:44 -0800, Gregg Kellogg wrote: >>> On Dec 24, 2013, at 3:10 PM, David Robillard <d@drobilla.net> wrote: >>> >>> Attached is an updated report for Serd on the latest Turtle test suite. >> >> Thanks, I've added your results to <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/reports/index.html>. > > Great, thanks. Would you like me to run one with the protested SPARQL > pReFiX/BaSe tests included, or is "UNTESTED" okay? > > (I personally prefer "UNTESTED" since the omission is deliberate) > > -- > dr >
Received on Friday, 27 December 2013 02:50:10 UTC