W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Comment handling and tests (was: Re: Agenda - 27 Mar @ 14:30 UTC)

From: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:31:04 -0400
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF55C823AB.DFC60B7C-ON852572AB.00537CF2-852572AB.006B36CC@us.ibm.com>

Hi everyone,

Well, given the Zakim failure and my late arrival at a site with Internet 
connectivity, we ended up without a meeting today. I wanted to drop a note 
with some of the content I had hoped to discuss today, to better set us up 
for the weeks to come.

1/ Comment handling

The period for Last Call comments on the query language spec. extends from 
now to April 18. Comments should be sent to the 
public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org . In general, we can receive two types of 
comments: editorial comments and substantive comments. Editorial comments 
should be responded to by the editors, who are free to act on any 
suggestions or defend the current text at their editorial discretion. 
Substantive comments are, for the most part, comments that would change 
implementation code. There are a variety of possible responses to 
substantive comments:

  + Some comments may be addressed already by the current spec. In this 
case, a pointer to the relevant part of the specification is an 
appropriate response.
  + Some comments may make suggestions that are out of scope for the 
group's charter, or reflect use cases or requirements that have not been 
adopted by the group in our UC&R document. In this case, a response citing 
the charter or UC&R is appropriate.
  + Some comments may reflect issues on which the group has already made a 
decision or has already postponed the issue. In these cases, if no new 
information has been presented that the group has not previously 
considered, an appropriate response will cite the relevant decision or 
  + Failing that (either because the issue has not been raised before or 
because new information has been presented), the Working Group should 
discuss the issue. In general in such cases, let's see if consensus 
emerges on this mailing list before falling back to discussion on a 

If a substantive comment comes in and can be dispatched of with one of the 
first three types of responses, feel free to do so on behalf of the 
working group. If you think the issue might require WG attention, feel 
free to forward it to this list.

DanC has some comment-tracking scripts that I'm going to use to keep a 
handle on what comments have not been adequately handled. To make these 
scripts work, when you reply to a commenter with an appropriate suggested 
resolution to their comment, please include the marker [OK?] in the 
subject line. Also, please ask the commenter to include [CLOSED] in the 
subject line if they are satisfied with the working group's response.

2/ Testing

If we had had the meeting today, we would have addressed the current 
pending tests that Jeen added to the .../data-r2 Web space. If you take a 
look at the mailing list thread referenced in the agenda, you'll see that 
Andy was able to pass all of the tests in ARQ, and I passed all of the 
tests (except for those which specify results in the .srx format, which I 
eyeballed for correctness) in Glitter.

Going forward, we need to do a few things (Jeen, please jump in if I've 
got anything wrong or have jumped the gun on anything):

  + more tests to approve - we need to look over existing tests and move 
them over into the new .../data-r2 Web space and update the new manifests. 
If you take a group of tests and do this, please send a note to this 
mailing list so that those of us with implementations can run the tests. 
If you run the tests, please report on the results; if you've eyeballed 
the tests and think there is a problem, please bring that up. Otherwise, 
we'll try to approve any proposed tests at the next teleconference after 
they're announced on this list.

  + an updated README - the existing README at 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/README is a bit out of date 
(c.f. the issue of some tests using the SPARQL Query Results XML Format; 
also issues surrounding SELECT with no keyword and SELECT REDUCED). It 
needs to be updated to help implementors properly execute the tests.

  + an udpated overview page - we could use the equivalent of 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/ for the new test area. I'm not 
familiar with how the current overview page is generated, so I don't know 
what this involves...

That's it for now -- we'll meet next week at our usual time (14:30 UTC on 
Tuesday) and place (#dawg). I'll let everyone know if there's an update on 
the teleconference-system situation. 


Lee Feigenbaum wrote on 03/25/2007 01:07:06 PM:

> Hi everyone,
> If you have a SPARQL implementation--or even if you don't--, it's time 
> start paying serious attention to the tests that we're approving. 
> Approving tests is much less painful if we have a number of positive (or 

> negative) reports from implementations. Please check out the "test 
> issue and try out the tests listed there, or at least look them over.
> Lee
> Note: The meeting is still at 14:30 UTC. As Europe has just changed to 
> summer time, if you are in a European country this week's call will be 
> hour later than previous weeks. In the US, the time is 10:30AM EDT and 
> 7:30AM PDT. If you're somewhere else, you know better than I do what 
> time 14:30 UTC is.
> 0. Convene [1]RDF Data Access WG meeting of Tuesday, 27 March, 2007 
> at 14:30:00 UTC
>          + LeeF chairing
>          + teleconference bridge: tel:+1.617.761.6200 
> tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152 code:7333
>          + on irc at: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
>          + Scribe: ericP
>          + Regrets: 
>          + roll call
>          + approve 20 Mar minutes [2]
>          + next meeting 3 Apr. @@ recruit scribe -- @@ the Chair might 
> at risk
>          + agenda comments?
> 1. Review ACTION Items
> These actions appear DONE:
> ACTION: AndyS to incorporate and explain the notion of active graph in 
> section 8 and/or wherever else appropriate
> ACTION: Eric to incorporate text for REDUCED into rq25, including text 
> noting that REDUCED does not play nicely with counting
> ACTION: ericP schedule teleconf for Friday
> Let's check on the status of the following actions:
> ACTION: EricP to run the yacker tool over and annotate the existing 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action03]
> ACTION: LeeF or EliasT to reply to Bjoern regarding (not) POSTing 
> application/sparql-query documents [recorded in 
> http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action07]
> ACTION: LeeF to remember that the wee, lost filter tests should be put 
> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/03/06-dawg-minutes.html#action05]
> 2. Last Call comment handling
> 3. Test suite
> Our attention now needs to turn to the test suite (and to responding to 
> the community's comments on the draft, of course). Let's return to the 
> latest set of tests that appear ready to be approved into the new test 
> suite:
> Jeen moved some query evaluation tests to the new testing environment...
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0080.html
> ...and Andy corrected a typo and reports that ARQ passes the tests.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0081.html
> Please try to take a look at these tests in advance so that we can 
> them.
> Eric proposed a syntax test similar to what we approved a few weeks ago 
> note that OPTIONAL clauses break up BGPs. He also suggested similar 
> for the GRAPH keyword.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JanMar/0079.html
> Let's discuss and approve these tests.
> 4. Towards CR
> @@
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
> [2] draft minutes are at http://www.w3.org/2007/03/20-dawg-minutes; I'd 
> rather have final minutes to approve, especially as they contain our 
> Call decision.
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 19:31:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:00:53 UTC