New test cases from Peter

Hi Peter,

thanks for submitting 3 new test cases [1]. I made a couple of syntactic 
corrections which you can track on github. Among the more critical 
changes were:

- the sh:value of the values.ttl test is ex:i, not 5, because the query 
does not return ?value and in that case the engine reverts to using the 
value node (which is the focus node in this case), see [2]

- I have deactivated the bind.ttl test case [3] because it is unclear 
what it is supposed to demonstrate. My current Jena-based engine returns 
no violation there, while your test seems to expect one violation. Could 
you explain the motivation for the test and the reason for your expected 
result?

- I have deactivated the shared.ttl test case [4] because it does not 
reflect the SHACL spec. The given validation result expects that the 
sh:node constraint is producing a violation with 
sh:ClassConstraintComponent as sourceConstraintComponent. However, the 
validation of sh:node (as explained in [5]) produces results with 
sh:NodeConstraintComponent as results. In other words, the results only 
report on conformance of the sh:node, and do not "walk" into it. Please 
feel free to submit an update to that test.

Regards,
Holger


[1] 
https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/pull/50/files/f857d2014900854ea1a0cf2ad498c9d0ae03cc0b..de60116e88470f51320e2442cce8698d7a44c6c8
[2] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#sparql-constraints-variables
[3] 
https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/tree/gh-pages/data-shapes-test-suite/tests/sparql/pre-binding
[4] 
https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/tree/gh-pages/data-shapes-test-suite/tests/core/validation-reports
[5] https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#NodeConstraintComponent

Received on Monday, 17 April 2017 00:55:52 UTC