Re: LC Status and implementation reports

On Jan 31, 2012 10:17 AM, "Boris Villazón Terrazas" <bvillazon@fi.upm.es>
wrote:
>
> Hi Eric
>
>
> On 31/01/2012 15:37, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>
>> * ashok malhotra<ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>  [2012-01-26 06:35-0800]
>>>
>>> On 1/26/2012 6:25 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Where are we in terms of being able to tell the world how to submit
tests results?
>>>
>>> We are running late on this.  First, are we happy with the test cases?
 We have not reviewed them in some time.
>>> Second, did we decide a format for submitting test case results?  We
discussed this but I don't remember a resolution.
>>
>> I recall that we were happy to emulate the SPARQL test report harness.
>
> Thanks for the reminder! ....
> Sorry but I'm not sure of a few things, and I want to be sure that the
options are
>
> A.
> 1. A particular R2RML implementation download the Test Suite, run it and
generate a set of nq files (as output of the TCs).
> 2. The owner of the implementation download the TestHarness software, run
against the generated nq files, and the software generates test report
> 3. The owner of the implementation upload the test report

This ishow SPARQL did it, and my understanding of how we've decided to do
it.

> B.
> 1. A particular R2RML implementation download the Test Suite, run it and
generate a set of nq files (as output of the TCs).
> 2. The owner of the implementation upload the results (the set of nq
files).
> 3. We run the TestHarness software against the results (uploaded
previously), and the software generates the test report
>
> In both cases the format of submitting the R2RML test case results is nq,
right?
>
> For the DM we'll have ttl files (instead of nq), right?
>
> Boris
>
> P.S. Sorry again if my questions are trivial

Easily answered, but important.

>> Here's an example:
>>
>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> # Example RDB2RDF test report for:
>> #<myProject>  : a doap:project with a doap:name .
>> #<myTestHarness>  : a earl:Software
>>
>> @prefix rdbf:<http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/rdb2rdf/test-cases/#>
>> @prefix doap:<http://usefulinc.com/ns/doap#>.
>> @prefix earl:<http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#>.
>> @prefix rdf:<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>.
>> @prefix rdfs:<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
>> @prefix xml:<http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace>.
>> @prefix dct:<http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
>>
>> <myProject>
>>        a doap:Project ;
>>        doap:name "My Project Name" ;
>>        doap:homepage<http://myproject.example/home/>  .
>>
>> <myTestHarness>
>>        a earl:Software ;
>>        dct:title "My Implementation RDB2RDF test harness" .
>>
>>
>> [] a earl:Assertion;
>>        earl:assertedBy<myTestHarness>  ; # my harness asserted that
>>        earl:subject<myProject>  ;        # my project
>>        earl:result [ a earl:TestResult ;
>>                earl:outcome earl:pass    # passed (vs. earl:fail)
>>        ] ;
>>        earl:test rdbf:D000-1table0rows . # the RDB2RDF test.
>> …
>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>> Third, should we create a separate mailing list for test case reports?
>>>
>>> Ashok
>>>
>