W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

[Issue needed] Re: Comments on RDF test cases

From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 14:29:40 +0000 (GMT)
To: Arjohn Kampman <arjohn.kampman@aidministrator.nl>
cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0303211425430.10520-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Arjohn Kampman wrote:

> Jan Grant wrote:
> >>Issue 2: The test cases error-009.rdf, error-010.rdf and error-020.rdf
> >>in rdfms-rdf-names-use look obsolete to me. These test cases are about
> >>rdf:aboutEach and rdf:aboutEachPrefix, which have been removed from the
> >>RDF spec some time ago. Use of these attributes is already covered by
> >>the test cases in rdfms-abouteach.
> >
> > Those test cases together deal with aboutEach and aboutEachPrefix in
> > element and attribute positions. It seems to me that they should all
> > remain. The manifest files correctly list all these cases as errors.
> > I'm not proposing to do anything further on this, unless there's a
> > particular problem..?
>
> There's no particular problem. It's just that all of the test cases
> in rdfms-rdf-names-use are about whether rdf names can be used in an
> RDF document as node element, property element and/or property attribute
> name. However, as rdf:aboutEach and rdf:aboutEachPrefix have been removed
> from RDF, use of these two names is illegal independent of their place in
> an RDF file.
>
> To dive a little deeper into the subject: the three test cases mentioned
> earlier and the two test cases from rdfms-abouteach each cover a different
> situation:
>
> rdfms-rdf-names-use/error-009.rdf: aboutEach as node element
> rdfms-rdf-names-use/error-010.rdf: aboutEachPrefix as node element
> rdfms-rdf-names-use/error-020.rdf: aboutEachPrefix as property element
> rdfms-abouteach/error001.rdf     : aboutEach as property attribute name
> rdfms-abouteach/error002.rdf     : aboutEachPrefix as property attribute name
>
> The one situation that is missing is the use of aboutEach as a property
> element. So maybe it should be added? Also, IMHO, it would be nicer to
> group these test cases together, e.g. in directory rdfms-abouteach.

Brian, please create an issue ID for this: "need negative test case for
aboutEach as a property element."

As to the proposed reorganisation: the vaguaries of CVS being what they
are and the desire to preserve existing URIs of test cases leads me to
disagree; an alternative approach would be to link the appropriate test
cases to the aboutEach issue.

Cheers,
jan

-- 
jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/
If it's broken really badly - don't fix it either.
Received on Friday, 21 March 2003 09:32:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT