Re: Turtle "coverage" test suite issues with N-Triples

On Mar 4, 2013, at 9:47 AM, David Robillard <d@drobilla.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 12:41 -0500, Gregory Williams wrote:
>> Gregg alerted to me to the fact that I had overlooked the "coverage" part of the test suite. In trying to run those, I've run into another problem that I wish to comment on.
>> 
>> The two eval tests:
>> 
>> #literal_with_FORM_FEED
>> #literal_with_BACKSPACE
>> 
>> are based on a comparison with N-Triples files that seem to rely on the
>> new, unpublished N-Triples grammar (with the use of escaped forms \b
>> and \f in strings). However, I don't see that this has anything to do
>> with testing of Turtle, and wonder why those files don't use the
>> serialization format from the existing N-Triples grammar (using the \u
>> escaped form). Moreover, even when/if a new N-Triples document is
>> published, I don't believe it's wise to base the new Turtle test suite
>> on the also new N-Triples grammar. The N-Triples files in the Turtle
>> test suite should conform to the existing grammar.
> 
> Yep, in order to pass these I had to break the backwards compatibility
> of my ntriples writing.  Easy solution is to make these a
> rdft:TestTurtlePositiveSyntax rather than a rdfs:TestTurtleEval.

As did I, and I commented on this in my own submission. Presumably, whoever's working on the test suite (Gavin?) can correct this, along with the other issues that have been reported.

Indeed, there's no good reason to include un-published features for N-Triples in the Turtle result files.

Gregg

> -dr
>

Received on Monday, 4 March 2013 18:37:49 UTC