W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > October 2008

[Bug 6105] [FT] Test Suite cont.

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 23:08:46 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1KvgdC-0008BQ-0r@farnsworth.w3.org>


Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>  2008-10-30 23:08:45 ---

Many thanks for your comments!  Please keep them coming!  (For tracking
purposes, it would be slightly better for you to put each separate comment into
a separate Bugzilla bug, if that's convenient.)

I have responded to each of your comments below:

[1] FTPrimary-FTWords-q1.xq

The child step "/div2" could to be rewritten to "//div2" to match the result

You are correct and we have updated the tests to correct the error. 

[2] FTPrimary-FTExtensionSelection-q1.xq

As far as I know, the pragma (# exq:classifier with class 'Antonyms' #) cannot
be specified at the current location. Moreover, by using pragmas, it might be
that not all implementations will yield correct results.

I have run the query that you identified above through the Full Text parser
applet (see http://www.w3.org/2007/01/applets/xquery-fulltextApplet.html) and
it appears to parse without error.  Therefore, I conclude that it is valid to
use the pragma where it appears in the example.  If you still believe that it
should not parse correctly, please help me understand why. 

It is, of course, true that "not all implementations" will return any given
result when pragmas are used.  However, there is no way to test whether
implementations are tolerant of pragmas without writing examples that contain
pragmas.  And that is the purpose of this test -- to ensure that
implementations will tolerate the presence of a pragma that they do not
understand.  (I do not expect that any implementation will recognize, or
implement, the "exq:classifier" pragma.)

[3] FTSelection-Weight-q1a.xq

Again, the location steps "/div[//a/@id" won't yield any results. The
alternative "//div2[@id=" should suffice.

You are, of course, correct.  I am mystified why I wrote the predicate the way
that I did, even though I recall doing it deliberately.  I have corrected these

[5] Examples/2.2.2/ft-222-examples-results-q1.txt

The correct result for "examples-222-q1.xq" should be:

<author>Melton Mowbray</author>

Actually, I think the result should be:

<author>Heavy Rain</author>
<author>Melton Mowbray</author>

That is, I believe that both books satisfy the ftcontains conditions
(particularly  because of "with stemming" applied to "dog").  I have changed
the result to reflect that belief.  If you still believe that only one author
should be returned, please help me understand why. 

[6] FTPrimary-FTWords-q1_result.xml

Here I get another result as well (it's based on the query rewriting of [1])..

Note that, along with the syntax rules above, there is an extra-grammatical 
<loc xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
href="#parse-note-multiple-match-options" xlink:type="simple"
xlink:show="replace" xlink:actuate="onRequest">multiple-match-options
which needs to be considered, if multiple match options are specified.
It states that within a single <nt xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
def="doc-xquery-FTMatchOptions" xlink:type="simple">FTMatchOptions</nt>
at most one match option of any given 
<termref def="dt-match-option-group">match option group</termref> may
be specified. 
For example, if the <nt xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
def="doc-xquery-FTCaseOption" xlink:type="simple">FTCaseOption</nt> "lowercase" 
is specified, then "uppercase" cannot also be specified as part of the same 
<nt xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" def="doc-xquery-FTMatchOptions"
<termdef id="dt-match-option-order" term="match option application order">
The order in which effective match options for an 
<nt xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" def="doc-xquery-FTWords"
xlink:type="simple">FTWords</nt> are applied 
 is called the <term>match option application order</term>.</termdef>
This order is significant
because match options are not always commutative.
For example,
is not always the same as

I do not see any difference between your result given above and the result that
I see in FTPrimary-FTWords-q1_result.xml.  Can you tell me what the differences
are?  There are some minor white space differences, but the XML comparison
ought to normalize those away. 

[7] XQFTTSCatalog.xml

=> "Testsources" -> "TestSources"

Fixed, thanks!

=> "FTSelection-Weight-1a.xq" -> "FTSelection-Weight-q1a.xq"
...same operation for all files in this directory

Fixed, thanks!

=> Query FTSelection-Weight-q1d
 an <expected-error> element should be added here as implementations can raise
errors for negative values

Fixed, thanks!

=> Query ft-34-examples-q2 - ft-342-examples-q4 -> don't exist yet

I'm not sure that I know what this report means.  In XQFTTSCatalog.xml, I have
found mention of ft-34-examples-q1 and ft-34-examples-q2, but no others.  Sure
enough, there are no files of those names in directory 3..4-MatchOptions. 
That's because the person responsible for writing the tests for that section
has created the catalog information but has not yet provided the actual tests. 
This will be resolved as test development proceeds. 

Again, many thanks for your comments, and we hope this means that you plan to
run the final test suite and report your results!

I am marking this bug as FIXED based on my responses above.  If you disagree,
feel free to REOPEN the bug; otherwise, please mark the bug CLOSED. 


Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 30 October 2008 23:08:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:24 UTC