- From: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:40:15 -0400
- To: 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
We've got a lot to do in the meeting tomorrow, including tests to
approve, test coverage / SPARQL features, comments handling, test URIs,
and the public test service.
I'm hoping to have in place at the end of a meeting a concrete plan
going forward to get to a point at which we can say "the test suite is
done" for the purposes of generating our implementation report.
Hope to see you all there.
Lee
0. Convene [1]RDF Data Access WG meeting of Tuesday, 31 July 2007
at 14:30:00 UTC
+ LeeF chairing
+ teleconference bridge: tel:+1.617.761.6200
tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152 code:7333
+ on irc at: irc://irc.w3.org:6665/dawg
+ Scribe:
+ Regrets:
+ roll call
+ minutes from last week [2]
+ next meeting 7 Aug. @@ recruit scribe, regrets?
+ agenda comments?
1. Review ACTION Items
These actions appear DONE:
ACTION: LeeF to mark 10 distinct tests in
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data-r2/distinct/manifest.ttl
as approved
ACTION: LeeF to mark type promotion tests approved
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data-r2/type-promotion/manifest.ttl
Let's check on the status of the following actions:
-- misc --
ACTION: ericP to poke IETF folks about registering SPARQL media types
(esp. application/sparql-query)
ACTION: ericP to write explanatory text saying that, like xsd:inteter
and xsd:dateTime, the relative order of simple literals and xsd:strings
is not defined here
-- implementation report --
ACTION: EricP to run the yacker tool over and annotate the existing
tests to summarize coverage
[ed: progress here - we'll discuss where we go from here during the
meeting]
ACTION: ericP & chimezie to see if all the identified algebraic forms
fit into the XPath-based facet approach
ACTION: ericP to requisition /TR/SPARQL as a switcher document pointing
to the real specs
ACTION: EliasT to come up with feature list for protocol testing
-- tests --
ACTION: ericP to write a test showing that langMatches doens't do
extended matching
ACTION: AndyS or LeeF to mark non-SELECT tests using :QueryForm classes,
and to move those URIs to the qt: namespace
ACTION: Eric+Andy to identify and collect mf:requires URIs and put in
documentation
ACTION: ericP, AndyS to add the mf:requires labels to the manifest
namespace document
2. Test suite
AndyS sent out tests for i18n that SteveH passes:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0033.html
...and tests for OFFSET and LIMIT that both SteveH and I pass:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0034.html
...and tests for ASK:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0041.html
Can anyone run the ASK tests? Any other comments on these tests? I'd
like to approve them, so please look at them before the meeting if you can.
3. Facets and Test Coverage
Andy says: moved everything from old suite.
Progress from EricP.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0039.html
But more up-to-date is:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/facets-coverage
Let's look at some of these missing coverage mark and decide
1) syntax only
2) is actually covered
3) not important to test
4) needs test (and action on test)
I'd like to spend time figuring out what's the shortest path from where
we are today to putting a stamp of approval on the test suite so that we
can begin seriously encouraging 'final' implementation reports.
I'd also propose ignoring redundancy for now, though I'm happy to have
someone add metadata to manifests that indicates redundancy.
4. Test URIs
There was discussion during and after last week's telecon. about what
the canonical URIs for tests are. (That is, what URIs do we expect in
EARL results.) Along with this discussion was discussion about content
neg. and providing RDF/XML versions of all of our Turtle test materials.
5. Test harness?
Let's get an update on the test service for SPARQL endpoints. We've
already had one request for such a service independent of our work:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/0040.html
6. Outstanding -comments messages
We owe responses to some messages on the -comments list. Let's see which
need discussion and which simply need replies.
EBV of invalid numeric literals
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2007Jul/0012.html
xs:all vs. xs:sequence
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/2007Jul/0010.html
Any others?
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2007JulSep/att-0031/24-dawg-minutes.htm
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 17:54:35 UTC