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

RE: tests and inference?

From: Thompson, Bryan B. <BRYAN.B.THOMPSON@saic.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:26:14 -0500
Message-Id: <D24D16A6707B0A4B9EF084299CE99B3919469CB6@mcl-its-exs02.mail.saic.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Thompson, Bryan B." <BRYAN.B.THOMPSON@saic.com>
Cc: andy.seaborne@hp.com, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>, "Bebee, Bradley R." <BRADLEY.R.BEBEE@saic.com>

Ah.  Thanks,

-bryan

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] 
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 9:21 AM
To: Thompson, Bryan B.
Cc: andy.seaborne@hp.com; RDF Data Access Working Group; Bebee, Bradley R.
Subject: RE: tests and inference?


On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 09:10 -0500, Thompson, Bryan B. wrote:
> Hum.  I think that testing for protocol conformance would be part of a 
> data access test suite ... but, let's focus on the other question:
> 
>   "Can DAWG deliver a test suite for the query language?"
> 
> It seems that unless there is a means to constrain what inference may 
> be performed in response to a query, that the behavior of the query 
> processor can not be tested.

Inference affects the input graph. Our tests state the input graph
explicitly. Given the input graph, the results of the query are determined
by the spec*.


* or... at least: I hope so;
the SOURCE designs seem to have multiple answers, and some
of the value testing designs do to; I sure hope we don't
choose those designs.

> 
> I think that a standard that can not be tested would be likely to show 
> lots of interoperability problems in the field.
> 
> -bryan

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2004 14:26:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:21 GMT