- From: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:18:45 -0800
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Dan Connolly wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 23:31 -0800, Dave Beckett wrote: > >>The langMatches definition: > > [...] > >>I think this is backwards, as an example following uses '*' in the >>second argument position, and so do the test cases I was puzzling over - >>q-langMatches-[1-4].rq > > > quite. fixed in > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/rq23/#func-langMatches > 1.643 of 2006/02/17 23:04:04 > > Please let us know if this comment addresses your questions to > your satisfaction. Yes, the change in 1.643 addresses my comment. > >>I'm also unsure about the tests as q-langMatches-3 returns an answer >>with no language but the definition above says * only matches non-empty >>languages. q-langMatch-4 which is the negative of that, is similarly >>affected. > > > I hope it's OK if I leave your question on the test materials aside, > for now. We'll be going over them in CR. OK, to keep this tracked for the future please record this thread as a test material comment. > > >>The tests also rely that LANG(non-literals) returns "" although it's not >>so explicit in the text to me as LANG() is only defined for literals, >>including in the table "SPARQL Unary Operators". I was returning a type >>error taking anything not allowed as forbidden. Dave
Received on Saturday, 18 February 2006 00:18:51 UTC