Re: Re: [R2RML Test Cases]

* Alex Miller <alexdmiller@yahoo.com> [2010-11-26 18:39-0800]
> > From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
> > To: Boris Villazón Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es>
> > Cc: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>; RDB2RDF WG 
> > <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
> > Sent: Fri, November 26, 2010 6:58:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: [R2RML Test Cases]
> > 
> > * Boris Villazón Terrazas <bvillazon@fi.upm.es> [2010-11-24 13:19+0100]
> > > Dear all,
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the feedback about the test cases.
> > > I'll update the test cases including all the feedback we got from
> > > Juan, ericP, Souri, etc.
> > > 
> > > During the telco, Eric created a new test case, you can check it at:
> > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/wiki/R2RML_Test_Cases#R2RMLTC0005b
> > > 
> > > Eric wants to discuss about this particular test case.
> > 
> > I added a discriminating query 'cause it's easier to compare the
> > results of selected SPARQL and SQL queries than to do graph compare.
> > 
> > Actually, this brings up an interesting question about re-using the
> > SPARQL test suite. How many of our implementors will offer a SPARQL
> > interface and already exploit the SPARQL suite? Do we want to try to
> > make their lives easier by using mostly the same test suite?

> I think reusing SPARQL from existing test suites would be extremely
> helpful for implementors.

The SPARQL test suite takes as input an RDF database (a set of
default and named graphs) and a query and produces one of:
  result set (SELECT, ASK)
  graph (CONSTRUCT)
  RDF database (INSERT, DELETE)

We can expect that most SPARQL implementations can:
  compare result sets
  compare graphs (that's actually a bit difficult)
  compare RDF databases (by comparing names and contents of graphs)

The SPARQL tests are defined in manifest files with include
  name
  description
  input
  output
  required extensions
  approval status

For direct mapping, we'd like a manifest to associate an RDB defined
by some SQL and a result graph. For r2rml, a an RDB, and R2RML config,
and a result RDF database. This seems like pretty good synergy with
the SPARQL tests.

> > > Best
> > > 
> > > Boris
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 23/11/2010 19:16, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
> > > >All,
> > > >
> > > >The minutes of today's meeting are available for review at [1] - Ted, thanks
> > > >a lot for scribing, I think you should do this more often ;)
> > > >
> > > >We have a couple of new actions all of which are available, also on a
> > > >per-product basis, via [2]:
> > > >
> > > >[NEW] ACTION: Ashok to review R2RML ED
> > > >[NEW] ACTION: Hausenblas to ask Lee if he can review R2RML ED
> > > >[NEW] ACTION: Hausenblas to create Wiki page with implementation status
> > > >[NEW] ACTION: Juan and Eric to draft Direct Mapping TC
> > > >[NEW] ACTION: Ted to review Direct Mapping ED
> > > >
> > > >Cheers,
> > > >       Michael
> > > >
> > > >[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/11/23-rdb2rdf-minutes.html
> > > >[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/track/actions/open
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > -ericP

-- 
-ericP

Received on Saturday, 27 November 2010 13:51:52 UTC