Re: Issues with TC 107-109...

Manu Sporny wrote:
> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> My question is different. I am not sure test #109 and and #108 are
>> fundamentally different (except for one more level). In other words, if
>> an implementation passes #108, it will pass #109, too, wouldn't it? If
>> so, then #109 might be superfluous...
> 
> Yeah, it might be superfluous, but I wanted to make sure that since we
> had the "strange" case of TC #107 not generating a triple, and TC#108
> generating one triple that TC#109 was there just to ensure that only 2
> triples are created (not three).
> 
> Although, now that you mention it... the SPARQL should probably be
> modified to ensure that only 2 are generated, not 3. I'll try to create
> some SPARQL that does that for TCs 108 and 109.
> 
> While TC 109 isn't a very strong test case, I don't think it hurts
> anything to put it in there (to be thorough).
> 

That is also true!

Ivan


> -- manu
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf