Re: [OK?] Re: Multiple DataSetClause grammar?

Thanks Jan for the patches.

-Elias

Jan Wielemaker <wielemak@science.uva.nl> wrote on 06/12/2006 11:16:33 AM:

> On Monday 12 June 2006 17:06, you wrote:
> > > I understand all three problems are problems with the test-set. I'll
fix
> > > these to keep going with the tests.  Is there any interest in the
> > > patches?
> >
> > Thanks send those along.
>
> Please find a diff attached. The diff is against the XML test-data. Note
> I deleted the 'UNSAID' dir. I think that is ok, but I'm not 100% sure.
>
> > > Most likely I'll come up with more.  Should I continue sending them
> > > one issue at a time to the list?
> >
> > Please do.
>
> Luckily, all remaining were obvious errors in the test-files.  I now
> cover all tests.  Time for semantics.  Sure there will be new problems
> there :-)
>
> > > I'm not familiar with this convention. I'm satisfied in the sense
that
> > > the answer answers my question, but the SPARQL test-set is still
broken.
> > > Is [CLOSED] appropriate in that case?
> >
> > Yes. That'd be appropriate. Can you please do that with the mailing
list
> > emails? Thanks!
>
> Ok.  I'll do that.
>
>    Thanks for the support
>
>       --- Jan
>
> [attachment "sparql-tests.diff" deleted by Elias Torres/Somers/IBM]