Roman Numeral test Was: Bug: "A value disjunction that encounters a type error on only one branch will return the result of evaluating the other branch."

Here I understand Yosi coded up cwm's SPARQL implementation with  
special SPARQL-compatible builtins written so as to match the spec.   
That doesn't mean that the spec is right or sensible or logical.  :-)

Tim

On Aug 8, 2005, at 15:03, Dan Connolly wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 13:42 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>
>> FYI, there's another test case available to study:
>>
>> Roman numeral test Dave Beckett (Monday, 8 August)
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/ 
>> 0228.html
>>
>> ->
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.rq
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.n3
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman- 
>> result.n3
>>
>>
>> Yosi, if you could look at that soon, I'd appreciate it.
>>
>
> I just looked at it with that cwm sparql server on mr-burns, yosi.
>
> It gives 0 results, which agrees with the last call design
> (and disagrees with the roman-results.n3 sketch).
>
> TimBL, can you confirm that cwm is giving 0 results by design?
>
>
>
>> The valueTesting issue (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ 
>> issues#valueTesting )
>> is on the agenda for tomorrow's teleconference, and it would
>> be nice to have input from the cwm/swap project in hand.
>>
> [...]
>
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
>

Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 13:25:51 UTC