- From: Rob Vesse <rvesse@dotnetrdf.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:46:10 -0800
- To: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- CC: <public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org>
Ok, I will go ahead and do that I will still try and get the harness running in my environment to see if I can track down what the issue is and will let you know if and when I find out whether the cause was the test harness or some bug in my implementation Rob On 12/19/12 11:44 AM, "Gregory Williams" <greg@evilfunhouse.com> wrote: >On Dec 19, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Rob Vesse wrote: > >>> Where are you seeing the double encoding? I'm able to take that POST >>> line, run it, and see this on the server side: >>> >>> ------------ >>> POST >>> >>>/?using-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fkasei.us%2F2009%2F09%2Fsparql%2F%20data%2 >>>Fd >>> >>>ata1.rdf&using-named-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fkasei.us%2F2009%2F09%2F%20sp >>>ar >>> ql%2Fdata%2Fdata2.rdf HTTP/1.1 >>> TE: deflate,gzip;q=0.3 >>> Connection: TE, close >>> Host: localhost:8881 >>> User-Agent: libwww-perl/5.834 >>> Content-Length: 27 >>> Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded >>> >>> update=sparql+update+string >>> ------------ >>> >>> Do you believe this is wrongly encoded? Given that there are several >>> implementations passing the protocol tests using this validator (I know >>> of ones in perl, java, and c++), I believe the problem may lie >>>elsewhere. >> >> It's my best guess at what the problem might be given that I have >> eliminated all other obvious explanations to the best of my ability. To >> clarify I have done the following: >> >> 1 - Running the command sequences manually through my web UI - All Pass >> 2 - Running the command sequences in those tests using CURL - All Pass >> (See >> >>https://bitbucket.org/dotnetrdf/sparql11-protocol-validator/src/tip/proto >>co >> l.sh?at=default) >> 3 - Running my Java ports of those tests - All Pass >> 4 - Running unit test versions of the command sequences I.e. eliminating >> any protocol interaction and adjusting the commands to add the >>USING/USING >> NAMED statements that the protocol should be adding - All Pass >> >> While I could have ported the tests incorrectly once, four times starts >>to >> seem a little unlikely, once I could do something dumb but believe me >>I've >> spent a lot of time staring at these tests already. So either the test >> harness is bad or my implementation is bad (or I really suck at copy and >> paste), given that I can get the tests to run successfully in four other >> ways I tend to lean towards some oddity in the test harness. > >I agree that seems strange, but that leaves us with several ways in which >your system is passing, and several other implementations that all work >just fine with the harness. > >> It may be double encoding or perhaps the tests that the harness runs >> aren't exactly the same as the tests as documented in the ReadMe (which >>as >> far as I can see is not the case)? >> >> Debugging this with the official harness is a PITA for me because I >>can't >> debug my live implementation using the public instance of the test >>harness >> and since I can't get the test harness to install and run locally yet I >>am >> rather stuck. >> >> I am not ruling out a bug in my implementation but it's hard to know >>where >> to look given all my ported versions of the tests pass and the >>difficulty >> of quickly running the tests in a usable debugging environment for my >> implementation. > >Well, the implementation report is based entirely on self-reported >results. It sounds to me like you've done due diligence on ensuring that >your implementation is in conformance with the spec and the tests as >written, and works with your client code. At this point, I think I'd >suggest simply submitting new EARL results indicating all passes and >marking the tests at issue with [ earl:mode earl:manual ]. > >thanks, >.greg >
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2012 19:47:27 UTC