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

Re: ACTION-492 completed: checked coverage of entailment tests

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 17:16:21 +0200
Cc: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org
Message-Id: <56BEB613-69B6-497F-BFD1-75A1B6CD5ECA@deri.org>
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>

On 8 Aug 2011, at 10:04, Andy Seaborne wrote:

> On 07/08/11 21:26, Axel Polleres wrote:
>> I did some (superficial) scan of caverage through the update test cases and added this at:
>>   http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/TestSuiteCoverage#Update
>> Covered:
>> 	 DROP
>> 	 CLEAR
>> Not covered:
>> 	 ADD, MOVE, COPY (also missing in the update syntax tests, cf http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2011-04-05)
>> 	 LOAD
>> 	 CREATE?
>> 	 Do we test SILENT wherever it is allowed? (i.e., LOAD, LOAD INTO, CLEAR, DROP, CLEAR/DROP NAMED/ALL/DEFAULT, CREATE, DROP, COPY, MOVE, ADD) in the syntax tests, at least LOAD seems to be missing.
>> 		 We don't have means to check errors in the test suite for Update (the test case structure just checks before and after state of the graph store), but we should at least test the syntax).
>> 	 Do we negative syntax test cases for bnodes (incl Turtle shortcuts) in INSERT DATA, DELETE DATA? (DELETE is already covered)
> I don't understand what you mean by the last point.  BNodes are legal in INSERT DATA, right?

yes, removed INSERT DATA.

> Bad syntax tests should be in:
> (Query)
> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/syntax-query/
> (Update)
> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/syntax-update-1/
> (There seem to be negative syntax tests elsewhere - is that a good idea?)

True, but that grew kind of "historically": We have e.g. some DELETE bnode tests in DELETE-INSERT, I believe, from when we discussed about the possibilities to allow that. I was a bit hesitant to move... but we could propose a general decision to move all NegativeSyntaxTests to those folders, and action someone to scan those cases...


> 	Andy
Received on Monday, 8 August 2011 15:16:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:04 UTC