W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: SERVICE tests available

From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:12:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4E00D0E6.6050002@thefigtrees.net>
To: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
CC: Carlos Buil Aranda <cbuil@fi.upm.es>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 6/21/2011 11:18 AM, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2011, at 11:07 AM, Carlos Buil Aranda wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I updated the manifest.ttl in the service tests using Greg's
>> proposal for action 482.
>
> I have a question about test :service6. The manifest has this:
>
> :service6 rdf:type mf:QueryEvaluationTest ; mf:name    "SERVICE test
> 6" ; dawgt:approval dawgt:NotClassified ; mf:requires
> mf:BasicFederation ; mf:action [ qt:query<service06.rq>  ;
> qt:data<data06.ttl>  ; qt:serviceData [
> qt:endpoint<http://example1.org/sparql>  ;
> qt:data<data06endpoint1.ttl> ] ; qt:serviceData [
> qt:endpoint<http://invalid.endpoint.org/sparql>  ; qt:data     "" ] ]
> ; mf:result<service06.srx>  .
>
> I'm not sure how I'm meant to interpret the string literal value for
> qt:data on the "invalid" endpoint. Since this test seems to be
> testing the SERVICE SILENT operation (for endpoints that don't exist
> or don't respond), I'd prefer some more explicit way to indicate
> that<http://invalid.endpoint.org/sparql>  is an endpoint mentioned in
> the query but that it is intended for that endpoint to not actually
> exist (for the purposes of the test).
>
> As it is now, I'd think the two reasonable interpretations of {
> :service6 qt:data "" } would be to either throw an error (expecting
> an IRI for the data but finding a literal), or ignoring the literal
> and setting up a mock endpoint at that address with no data in it.
> Neither of these will result in the expected behavior.
>
> I think the best way forward would either be to come up with some new
> syntax for indicating an endpoint that is used in the query but that
> is not meant to participate in query evaluation, or two simply remove
> that serviceData block and let the test harness notice that the query
> mentions an endpoint that wasn't described in the manifest.

Agreed. I prefer the 2nd option -- just leave out that endpoint from the 
manifest.

Lee

>
> Thoughts?
>
> thanks, .greg
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 17:12:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:46 GMT