W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: more sorting test cases

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:00:08 +0100
Message-ID: <42724BF8.60302@hp.com>
To: Jeen Broekstra <jeen@aduna.biz>
CC: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org

Jeen Broekstra wrote:
> FYI I have checked in a few new sorting test cases, and have amended 
> test case 3 slightly (to be more reflective of the current spec).
> - test case 3 sorts lexically on URIs where possibly an unbound value
>    occurs (amended from original: only 1 unbound now occurs).
> New cases:
> - test case 4 sorts on datatyped (integer) literals.
> - test case 5 sorts on two variables: first on untyped literal name
>    (lexically), then on datatyped literal. The query here is identical
>    to the third example for ORDER BY in the current WD (see section
>    10.1).
> - test case 6 sorts on a mixed result of literals and URIs.
> - test case 7 sorts on typed literals with different types (float and
>    int).

I have executed this test cases successfully and checked the results properly 
now.  The hardest part was processing the indexed result sets without using a 
query to access the indexes in order :-)

> AFAICT this about covers most specified cases. I've come up with a 
> number of other test cases as well (mixed bindings of untyped and 
> typed literals, bnodes, etc.), but for most of these the spec does not 
> specify a specific ordering.

Ordering between mixed items is determined but ordering within them may not be.

(Lowest) no value assigned to the variable in this solution.
Blank nodes
RDF literals

A total ordering isn't appropriate as Pat pointed out - it depends on what 
datatypes the processor understands.


> Jeen
Received on Friday, 29 April 2005 15:00:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:47 UTC