W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Turtle test donations

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:16:22 +0000
Message-ID: <514EE086.6000704@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-comments@w3.org


On 24/03/13 00:06, Peter Ansell wrote:
> On 24 March 2013 08:38, Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org> wrote:
>> I reviewed the Turtle 2013 doc and the test suite hanging out in mercurial a
>> few weeks ago at
>>    https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/
>> I'm still not clear if these define conformance; I asked about this in
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Feb/0026.html
>>
>> I've got some tests I made for raptor after the original Turtle submission
>> that the WG might want to use.  I give permission for them to be used
>> under the W3C software license
>> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright-software-20021231

(unofficial; just trying to speed things up)

I think the plan is to dual license the test suite - the W3C software 
license and the W3C Test Suite license.

The test suite license does not permit modification (which is kind of 
natural - the test suite is supposed to be a fixed reference point). So 
it is not an open source license [2] (no right to modify).

Being dual licensed, you can take it and modify it under the software 
license which is an open source license.

Does that work for you?

[1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2008/04-testsuite-license.html
[2] http://opensource.org/osd

>>
>> This is what they test:
>>     test-33.ttl - \\ at end of """
>>     test-35.ttl - what are rules for "foo"@lang^^uri ?
>>     test-36.ttl - check for greedy lexers
>>     test-37.ttl - long literal with lang tag
>>     test-38.ttl - unicode surrogates ok or not
>>
>> test-35 is not strictly legal but I had to decide what to do; I dropped
>> the language.
>
> In RDF-1.1 if the type uri was rdf:langString I would expect the
> language could be preserved.

As the Turtle grammar is currently defined in LC, the syntax for 
literal had either a @lang xor a ^^datatype.

[128s] 	RDFLiteral 	::= 	String (LANGTAG | '^^' iri)?

The fact that in the data model there is a fixed datatype for a @lang is 
not reflected in the grammar.

	Andy

>
> Peter
>
Received on Sunday, 24 March 2013 11:16:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:55 UTC