W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2004

RE: Simple source tests

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:29:12 +0100
Message-ID: <8D5B24B83C6A2E4B9E7EE5FA82627DC9396CC7@sdcexcea01.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Steve Harris" <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Cc: "RDF Data Access Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>


Tests dawg-source-simple-00{4,5} illustrate queries involving SOURCE
over a graph with a single named container in a collection of named
containers (CNC) - which is the whole graph / [test 4] - and query over
a single RDF graph - no containers, just a plain RDF graph [test 5].

There are two possible ways to go on the case of:

   SOURCE ?src (?x ?y ?z)

and no CNC, just a plain graph, no name, no concept of named container.

1/ It can match with ?src unbound, or it can fail.  
2/ It can fail

Both would be reasonable: the first is more liberal, but if you are
sending a query expecting a CNC and there isn't one, then it's a bit
like sending a query expecting FOAF query to graph with RSS data.

Dan wrote:
> I don't see how test dawg-source-simple-005 works.
> simple-data-1.n3 isn't referenced in the input data,

I'm not sure which version of the tests you were looking at.  The
original version of the tests that I checked in, had no data files
assigned in the manifest except for test 5 (plain graph);  tests 1-4 got
their data from the FROM clause ; test 5 does not have a FROM clause and
got its graph to query from the query context (here, the manifest).  I
used this to be able to differentiate between a query over a CNC and
query where is just a graph, no a CNC.

Steve changed my tests to make the page generation work by adding back
in the data files for queries 1-4 in the manifest.  This broke them and
I have fixed up something for now.  It can only be a temporary solution,
because the test suite can't express the difference between querying a
plain old graph and a CNC as currently setup.


-------- Original Message --------
> From: Dan Connolly <>
> Date: 14 October 2004 18:53
> On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 11:36, Steve Harris wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 04:04:16PM +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> > > Steve,
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure what the process is for tests.  Do I send them to you
> > > for inclusion or do I put then in CVS and let you know?  I checked
> > > into to CVS the tests for: 
> > > 
> > >
> > > 
> > > Feel free to "organise" them into wherever they should go.
> > 
> > OK, I've built the HTML and commited.
> I don't see how test dawg-source-simple-005 works.
> simple-data-1.n3 isn't referenced in the input data,
> as far as I can tell. How does it become part of the solution?
> The query engine doesn't have access to the test
> manifest, does it?
> Have the definitions in the relevant part of the spec
> been enhanced to show how SOURCE solutions are defined?
> No, not yet. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#source
> $Revision: 1.117 $ of $Date: 2004/10/13 11:32:06 $
> I hope they get elaborated soon.
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 15 October 2004 08:29:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:45 UTC