- From: Seaborne, Andy <andy.seaborne@hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:29:11 +0000
- To: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>
- CC: 'RDF Data Access Working Group' <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Lee Feigenbaum wrote: > I added the following tests. > > syntax-sparql5/manifest#syntax-reduced-01 > syntax-sparql5/manifest#syntax-reduced-02 ARQ passes the syntax tests. > > reduced/manifest#reduced-1 > reduced/manifest#reduced-2 > The latter two are rdf:type'd as both mf:QueryEvaluationTest Some people may find it a nuisance to have two types on a test. Maybe a qualifier would be better in the style of requirements and notable features. My plan at the moment is to ignore this and ask the query if it is a REDUCED syntax query. > and also as > mf:ReducedCardinalityTest. The intended semantics of the latter is: > > + The given mf:result for a mf:ReducedCardinalityTest is the results as > if the REDUCED keyword were omitted. To pass a > mf:ReducedCardinalityTest, an implementation must produce a result set > with each solution in the expected results appearing at least once and > no more than the number of times it appears in the expected results. Of > course, there must also be no results produced that are not in the > expected results. I have added this to test-manifest.n3 Other notes: 1/ Comments for test types have bad white space in the comments. 2/ test-manifest.n3 was broken at :IllFormedLiterals rdf:type :Notable ; because it was "red:type". Fixed this as I needed to regenerate the vocabulary. > > (More elegant wording welcomed.) > > I haven't run them. Sorry - if someone could run them and let me know if > they pass or not, that would be great. > > We'll look at these for approval on Tuesday. > > Lee More on passing the execution tests sometime. Andy -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Friday, 9 November 2007 18:29:46 UTC