- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:38:23 +0000
- To: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- CC: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 22/03/11 15:05, Gregory Williams wrote: > I'd like to suggest that we change the following tests to negative syntax tests based on the recent prohibition of bnodes in DELETE templates: > > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-03 > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-03b > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-05 > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-06 > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-07 > http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/delete-insert/manifest#dawg-delete-insert-07b > > Tests 05 and 06 actually use the same query with different data, so they'd end up being duplicate syntax tests. > > .greg Is there enough coverage in: http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/docs/tests/data-sparql11/syntax-update-1/ syntax-update-bad-13.ru syntax-update-bad-14.ru syntax-update-bad-15.ru Probably better to add coverage if not, rather than spread the syntax tests through out the test suite. Andy
Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 14:39:02 UTC