W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > April 2010

Re: use of only Turtle in RDF imports test cases

From: Stella Mitchell <stellamit@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:00:50 -0400
Message-ID: <y2td64b0f2c1004151500k47da5f0fr835a66b7e6b59568@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:

>
> In drafting a reply to a comment [1] I realized it's pretty odd that our
> RDF test cases require having a turtle parser, not an RDF/XML one.
>
> I think we ought to have the import statement not indicate the format
> (take off the ".turtle" suffix in the import statements), and then at
> the given URL provide both turtle and RDF/XML.  The w3.org Web server
> will do this automatically if there are files with the same basename and
> the ".rdf" and ".ttl" suffixes.
>
> 1.  Does anyone disagree this is conceptually the right thing to do?
>
> 2.  Stella, is this something you can do?  Do you have software (eg
>    Jena) which read turtle and output RDF/XML?
>

    Yes, I can remove the .turtle from the import urls in the testcases and
provide the imported
    files in both turtle and rdf/xml format with those suffixes, by early
next week.


>
> If there's no problem here, I'm inclined to tell the commenter that we
> acknowledge this as a deficiency of the test suite and will correct it.
> My hope is that our promise to correct it will be sufficient for the
> commenter to be satisfied, so we wont actually need to do it before PR.
> Make sense?
>
>     -- Sandro
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Response_to_JA
>
>
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 22:01:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 15 April 2010 22:01:25 GMT