- From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:15:23 +0100
- To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Cc: "Andy Seaborne" <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>, "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 2010-08-25, at 13:03, Axel Polleres wrote: > I read this as a proposal to be added to the test cases vocabulary, i.e. > > mf:NegativeSyntaxTest ... SPARQL1.0 negative syntax test > mf:NegativeSyntaxTest11 ... SPARQL1.1 negative syntax test > mf:PositiveSyntaxTest ... SPARQL1.0 positive syntax test > mf:PositiveSyntaxTest11 ... SPARQL1.1 positive syntax test > > In principle, I have no objection against this, but > 1) it worries me that people who have been running their engine > against the SPARQL1.0 test suite need to adapt their tools > > 2) if we do that, we also should probably distinguish > mf:QueryEvaluationTest > mf:QueryEvaluationTest11 > > Overall, isn't it simpler to just keep SPARQL1.0 only tests in a separate > manifest and mark those? Can't they just be left in the old tree? I don't see any need to produce a combined testsuite. Leaving the 1.0 tests as they were at publication is the only way to be sure that the semantics haven't been changed. - Steve -- Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/ Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11 Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2010 13:16:03 UTC