- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2011 11:00:39 -0400
- To: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>
- CC: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Hi Dave, Could you please supply us with another example test that you have concerns about? many thanks, Lee On Behalf of the SPARQL WG On 11/1/2011 10:58 AM, Dave Beckett wrote: > Nope. > > My comment was about tests using SHA224 as an example not about SHA224. > Please confirm that the tests no longer rely on distinctness of the output > triples. > > Dave > > > On 11/1/11 7:25 AM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote: >> Hi Dave, >> >> The Working Group has recently resolved to remove the SHA224 function from >> SPARQL 1.1 Query. As a byproduct of this, the test in question below has >> also been removed from the test suite, so I think that the below issue is no >> longer relevant. >> >> If you could reply to the list to acknowledge that this addresses your >> comment, we'd appreciate it. >> >> best, >> Lee >> On behalf of the SPARQL WG >> >> On 10/9/2011 1:48 PM, Dave Beckett wrote: >>> A lot of the functions/* tests such as sha224-02 got unicode added >>> recently which assumes the output result rows are distinct. This broke >>> many of my rasqal tests. >>> >>> This is a bad idea for two reasons >>> 1) you should not make this assumption >>> 2) it does not distinguish the state of the two tests in the file - the \u >>> form or the unicode form. If something broke, you couldn't tell since >>> only 1 result is expected >>> >>> so instead of: >>> :s8 :str "\u98DF", "食" . >>> >>> use >>> :s8 :str "\u98DF" . >>> :s9 :str "食" . >>> >>> and adjust the output results to suit >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 1 November 2011 16:09:23 UTC