Re: Call for Concensus: Corrections for tests plus-1 and plus-2

> On Nov 8, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
> 
> From the PR <https://github.com/w3c/rdf-tests/pull/23>:
> 
> SPARQL 1.1 tests functions/plus-1 and functions/plus-2 include ORDER BY. Unfortunately, they sort strings against numbers. This ordering is undefined by strict SPARQL. The results also don't identical query solutions adjacent in the ordering which is quite odd.
> 
> This PR corrects that by removing the ORDER BY. The data and results are unchanged. ORDER BY is not a feature being tested.
> 
> Any system passing the original tests will still pass these corrected tests. 
> 
> The queries and the references in the manifest are renamed as plus-1-corrected and plus-2-corrected.
> 
> It may well be that systems are not checking the ordering when the query has ORDER BY in it.
> 
> Background: Apache Jena puts a total ordering on any ORDER BY with permitted extensions to compare literals with different datatypes (roughly, sort by lexical form then by datatype)
> 
> Adds queries plus-1-corrected.rq, plus-2-corrected.
> Removes plus-1.rq and plus-2.rq.
> Results remain the same.

This looks good to me. My Attean system passes the new tests (and I admit to being one of systems that doesn’t test ordering for ORDER BY queries).

One thing I’m curious about is entirely removing the dawgt:approval triples in the manifests. In my previous SPARQL PR (#21) I used dawgt:approval dawgt:NotClassified for the new tests, but I wonder if CG approval should be indicated similarly (or identically) to the WG dawgt:approval dawgt:Approved indication. I think this is especially important if we’re not going to clean up the obsoleted or un-approved tests from the manifests, but think we should at least discuss the issue either way.

thanks,
.greg

Received on Monday, 9 November 2015 04:19:55 UTC