Re: LDP Testsuite Execution Report for Carbon LDP

On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Miguel Aragon <>
> Here is the report of the Testsuite Execution against our implementation:
Carbon LDP.
> Is this the only report that needs to be sent?
Great progress and thanks for sending the results.  I have added your EARL
results file to the test suite github repo [1] and I have updated the WG
conformance report [2].  I don't think anything else is needed to send.
 The Eclipse Lyo implementation results were sent for each variation of
Direct Containers that exist.


> Regarding the actual experience running the tests, we had to make some
minor adjustments (which I have created a pull request for) to adapt to our
implementation. Those adjustments were because of the following reasons:
> 1. The Interaction Model isn't specified when retrieving a Container to
later send it on a PUT request. On GET requests to Containers we return
multiple resources. Because of this, we don't accept PUT requests to
Containers using the default Interaction Model (ldp:Container for

This might require some additional discussion, as I don't understand what
the problem is.  The interaction model is set when the Container is created
[3] (done outside of the test suite).

[[ LDP servers that successfully create a resource from a RDF
representation in the request entity body must honor the client's requested
interaction model

> 2. Regarding IndirectContainers, the testsuite doesn't give an option to
specify the ldp:insertedContentRelation of the IndirectContainer (which is
the main point of using IndirectContainers). This pull request was created
to fix that.

Just some those who follow this know, we have continued this discussion in
the pull request.  Looking to derive the value from the Indirect Container
itself, saving the additional setup,

- Steve

> Yours sincerely,
> Miguel Aragón, Base22

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2014 14:37:53 UTC