W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > August 2005

Re: Bug: "A value disjunction that encounters a type error on only one branch will return the result of evaluating the other branch."

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:42:15 -0500
To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
Cc: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu>
Message-Id: <1123526535.18971.722.camel@dirk>

FYI, there's another test case available to study:

Roman numeral test Dave Beckett (Monday, 8 August)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0228.html

->

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.rq
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.n3
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman-result.n3


Yosi, if you could look at that soon, I'd appreciate it.

The valueTesting issue (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/issues#valueTesting )
is on the agenda for tomorrow's teleconference, and it would
be nice to have input from the cwm/swap project in hand.

Also, the WG approved a relevant test last week: extendedType-eq-pass-result.n3 
though since we approved it, my understanding of the issue has changed
and in any case the #valueTesting issue remains open.


Ah... elsewhere I see mail from EricP "at risk in the interval 8 Aug to 18 Aug"
Hmm. EricP, I guess I consider you at-risk for tomorrow's DAWG teleconference.
I didn't realize that when I put the agenda together. If the uncertainty
around the risk resolves either way, please let me know.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 8 August 2005 18:42:21 GMT

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