Bundle of test cases here. test1: empty element with an rdf:resource attribute test2: empty element test3: empty element, "Literal" parseType test4: empty element, "Resource" parseType. test5: empty element, rdf:ID attribute (produces reification) test6: empty element, rdf:ID attribute and parseType "Resource". For the latter two tests, I've included an xml:base attribute in the containing rdf:RDF element so that the rdf:ID is calculated corrently (can someone check this?) tests 7-12 mirror 1-6, but use explicit closing tags, ie: <tag></tag> instead of <tag/> the expected outputs are identical. Finally, the two error cases are empty elements with parseType="Resource" and an rdf:resource attribute. These should not be accepted as legal RDF. jan -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287163 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk Unfortunately, I have a very good idea how fast my keys are moving.
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:37:00 EDT