- From: George Huo <ghuo@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:45:12 -0400
- To: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
I tried to send this message originally over a week ago, but ran into problems with the W3C List Manager registering my approval. Hopefully this makes it through! ----- Forwarded message from ghuo ----- To: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org Subject: Updates to tools Hello, I have been working on 2000/10/swap/pim/toIcal.py and 2002/12/cal/ical2rdf.pl for the past few weeks. I had the original goal of round-trip testing, and I soon discovered that I had to add a good deal of functionality to pass any test cases. Currently, all 20 test cases in $CAL/test round-trip successfully. I adopted Tim's regression test harness pieces from cwm, which now live at $CAL/test/cal-retest.py and $CAL/test/cal-regression.n3. To run the tests: $ cd 2002/12/cal/ $ make test Note that I've been testing using an old copy of swap with cwm 1.132; something related to URI.py seems to break the tests in the current swap. toIcal.py is more modular now. It should be easier to add enumerated and text fields; see exportGeneral().`X-' fields work, though they currently depend on the namespace being called "x:". In ical2rdf.pl, I fixed parameters that were enumerated types (and should be symbols) that were being ignored. The parameter parsing no longer trips up on values that contain colons enclosed in quotes (see cal02). It also correctly handles fields that can be both enumerated values or free text. While coding and reading the spec, there were a few issues that were unclear. First, toIcal.py was originally stripping spaces from every field exported as text. This broke round-tripping in many of the examples that contained "TZNAME=BST ". I removed the strip; is this how we want to handle TEXT types? (see http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2445.txt 4.8.3.2, 4.3.11) The ATTACH field is supposed to be of type `uri,' so it is represented using rdf:resource. However, in a couple cases (see 20030115mtg), the usage appears: ATTACH;VALUE=URI:Ping which results in: <attach rdf:resource='Ping'/> Is it okay to directly convert something that's not a real URI? Cheers, -George ----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 13:45:48 UTC