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

Re: Example protocol test

From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:13:40 +0100
Message-ID: <42FA19A4.8060207@hp.com>
To: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: DAWG public list <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>



Steve Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 01:07:17 +0100, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
>>
>>Steve Harris wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~swh/protocol-tests/data/construct/
>>>
>>>A step towards completing 'ACTION SteveH: elaborate "CONSTRUCT with content
>>>negotiation" into a test case'
>>>
>>>I've not run it, and in particular the data is just back-extrapolated from
>>>the query and results, so it might not be as intended.
>>>
>>>There is no schema for the manifest yet, I'l write one if its deemed
>>>acceptable.
>>>
>>>PS Kendall, in this example in the protocol doc. revision 1.57 theres not
>>>  enough escaping in the query.
>>>
>>>- Steve
>>>
>>
>>A test is modelled as name/action/result where action is often a pair of 
>>query and data file.  This split could be used here:
>>
>>	rdfs:label "CONSTRUCT with content negotiation" ;
>>	mf:action [
>>		ptest:data <conneg-data.rq> ;
>>                ptest:query <conneg-query.rq> ;
>>	     	ptest:acceptType "text/rdf+n3, application/rdf+xml" ;
>>    		ptest:defaultGraph <http://my.example/jose/foaf.rdf> ;
>>                  ] ;
>>
>>        mf:result [
>>		ptest:preferredResult [ ... ] ; 			 
>>		ptest:preferredResult [ ....] ;
>>		ptest:compliantResult [ ....] ;
>>                  ] ;
> 
> 
> I can see that grouping the action under a single node makes things
> clearer, but adding a level of indirenction to the results seems a bit
> pointless.

It means that you can get the results withut that piece of code knowing all the 
possible extensions a ptest:*Result results.  Subproperties of mf:result also 
work but it might be odd to have multiple results for a single action rather 
than one one action, one result which can be of different kinds.

My code has a layer that only understands mf:*.  At the moment, I don't apply 
RDFS inference but could do so.

> 
> Anyway, I'll go with whatever most people prefer.

Cool.

> 
> - Steve
> 

	Andy

PS I put a snapshot copy of my tests at:

http://jena.hpl.hp.com/~afs/ARQ-tests-2005-08-10.tar.gz
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 15:15:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT