W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: another update test added (was: RE: Questions on grammar restrictions on Blank Node reuse across...)

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 09:11:33 +0100
Message-ID: <4FC33335.7010406@epimorphics.com>
To: public-rdf-dawg@w3.org


On 26/05/12 16:01, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On May 26, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
>
>> As per
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0165.html
>>
>>
>>
I added the test case corresponding to this one:
>>
>>>> 2) Do we agree that the semantics of
>>>>
>>>> update1 =  INSERT { GRAPH<g2>   { ?S ?P ?O } } WHERE {
>>>> GRAPH<g1>   {?S ?P ?O } } ; INSERT { GRAPH<g2>   { ?S ?P ?O }
>>>> } WHERE { GRAPH<g1>   {?S ?P ?O } }
>>>>
>>>> should be GS''
>>
>> now under:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/basic-update/insert-05.ru
>>
>>
>>
(since I have no implementation at hand to run it at the moment, I'd 
appreciate feedback in case there's any issues)
>
> Do you think there's an automated way to test this? I ran the new
> test against my engine, and it failed. Here's why:
>
> mf:result [ ut:graphData [ ut:graph<insert-05-g1-pre.ttl>  ;
> rdfs:label "http://example.org/g1" ] ; ut:graphData [
> ut:graph<insert-05-g1-pre.ttl>  ; rdfs:label "http://example.org/g2"
> ] ; ] ;
>
> When my test harness parses insert-05-g1-pre.ttl into the two graphs,
> the bnode will be parsed twice, in two different contexts, yielding
> two different internal blank node labels (do we agree that this is
> the expected behavior?). And so instead of comparing my actual
> results against
>
> GS'' = {} <g1>  { _:b :p :o } <g2>  { _:b :p :o }
>
> I end up comparing against something new:
>
> GS'''' = {} <g1>  { _:b :p :o } <g2>  { _:c :p :o }
>
> Which still succeeds at testing for the operation being idempotent,
> but has different bnodes in the two graphs.
>
> I'm not sure how to make this succeed except by manually "fixing" my
> test results before submitting them (which I really don't want to
> do).
>

Agreed.

A way to test this is to add:

prefix : <http://example.org/>
INSERT { GRAPH :g2  { ?S ?P ?O } }
  WHERE { GRAPH :g1  { ?S ?P ?O } } ;

INSERT { GRAPH :g2  { ?S ?P ?O } }
  WHERE { GRAPH :g1  { ?S ?P ?O } } ;

INSERT { :s :triplesInG2 ?count }
WHERE
{
    { SELECT (count(*) As ?count)
      {
        GRAPH :g2  { ?S ?P ?O }
      }
    }
} ;

INSERT { :s :matchesG1G2 ?count }
WHERE
{
    { SELECT (count(*) As ?count)
      {
        GRAPH :g2  { ?S ?P ?O }
        GRAPH :g1  { ?S ?P ?O } # Checks sharing.
      }
    }
} ;


DROP :g1 ;
DROP :g2 ;

and check the default graph for counts of 1 and 1.




> .greg
>
>
Received on Monday, 28 May 2012 08:12:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:48 GMT