- From: Gregory Williams <greg@evilfunhouse.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 19:30:51 -0400
- To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Cc: sparql Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I've addressed both of the issues noted below and now see the latest Fuseki snapshot build passing all protocol tests. .greg On Aug 27, 2012, at 4:54 PM, Gregory Williams wrote: >> I'm now at 30/34 failing these tests. >> >> update_dataset_default_graphs >> update_dataset_named_graphs >> update_dataset_full >> bad-update-missing-direct-type >> >> The first 3 are for the same reason. >> >> Issue 1: >> update_dataset_default_graphs >> update_dataset_named_graphs >> update_dataset_full >> >> Could you explain these please? From logging the Fuseki server requests received I don't see how they are supposed to return the ASK result of true that is expected: > > It sounds like I just made a mistake in the tests. I'll look into it and make adjustments as necessary. > >> Issue 2: >> bad-update-missing-direct-type >> >> This test is sending a SPARQL Update without content type. >> >> With a no "Content-type" request, Fuseki assumes "application/sparql-update" which makes it easier for simple clients to open a POST stream and send an update. >> >> I don't see anything in the spec that requires an error if the content type is not 'application/x-www-url-form-urlencoded' and not 'application/sparql-update'. >> >> My reading is that it is simply outside the spec at this point so a server that does something is not non-conformant, just helpful. > > Yeah, that's a reasonable understanding of the spec. I wrote a bunch of tests that were closer to best-practice tests than normative tests, but that one seems to have been included in the normative set. I'll remove it (or make it optional or something).
Received on Sunday, 9 September 2012 23:31:14 UTC