Re: where is the ratified sparql 1.1 test suite?

On May 17, 2015, at 2:11 PM, james anderson <james@dydra.com> wrote:
> 
> good evening,
> 
> i find this solution in the document held by the w3c at <http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/functions/strbefore01a.srx> .
> 
>   <result>
>    <binding name="s"><uri>http://example.org/s2</uri></binding>
>    <binding name="prefix"><literal></literal></binding>
>   </result>
> 
> i find this solution in the respective document contained in the tar archive, <http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/sparql11-test-suite-20121023.tar.gz>, a link to which is included in the <http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/> .
> 
>   <result>
>    <binding name="s"><uri>http://example.org/s2</uri></binding>
>    <binding name="prefix"><literal xml:lang="ja"></literal></binding>
>   </result>
> 
> this latter depicts a result which does not agree with the definition in the recommendation. the same situation applies to the result document, "strafter01.srx".
> there was discussion[1] related to this during the ratification process, but the messages indicate no conclusion with respect to the test documents themselves
> 
> is there any archive file which comprises the ratified test suite?

James,

I believe that the problem you’re referring to here is the difference between “” and “”@ja in the results files? I’m not able to find the language-tagged (bad) version of that data in the approved test suite. The tests :strbefore01a and :strafter01a both reference seemingly-valid result files (strbefore01a.srx and strafter01a.srx).

However, the CVS repository and tarball of the test suite also contain old files that contain the invalid data (strbefore01.srx and strafter01.srx). This is unfortunate, but shouldn’t cause problems so long as you are using the manifest files to find approved tests and their associated files.

.greg

Received on Monday, 18 May 2015 14:02:46 UTC