Re: Last Call for additional SHACL Tests

I have submitted the following tests.

Tests of various aspects of pre-binding that needed fixing
- resulted in change to SHACL
- failed by at least one implementation

./sparql/pre-binding/values-2
./sparql/pre-binding/minus
./sparql/pre-binding/bind
./sparql/pre-binding/values

Tests of SHACL Core processors on SHACL-SPARQL constructs
- resulted in clarification to SHACL

./sparql/core/sparql-conform
./sparql/core/sparql-nonconform
./sparql/core/component-nonconform
./sparql/core/component-conform

Tests for property paths that share structure or are unused

./core/path/path-complex-002
./core/path/path-unused-001

Tests on nodeshapes for datetime data values, repeated components, allowed
qualifiedValue parameters
- test interesting cases for SHACL Core

./core/node/class-003
./core/node/minInclusive-002
./core/node/minInclusive-003
./core/node/qualified-001

Tests of WG shacl-shacl shapes graph, shared sub-shapes, subclasses of SHACL
syntax classes
- test interesting cases for SHACL Core
- test of large shapes graph created by working group

./core/complex/shacl-shacl
./core/complex/shared-001
./core/complex/subclass-of-nodeshape

Test of other value for true
- test of interesting case for SHACL Core

./core/property/uniqueLang-002

Test of possibility of sharing results in validation report
- test of different possibliity for validation report

./core/validation-reports/shared


I don't view them as low quality at all.

peter


On 04/25/2017 03:13 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> you had submitted a number of pull requests and I have tried to merge them all
> in. Unfortunately many of the test cases you have submitted had serious
> problems and overall low quality. Errors included invalid Turtle files (did
> not even parse), mismatching URIs in tests and data, malformed manifest files,
> logic errors. I had spent several hours fixing most of them, and notified you
> about the various errors.
> 
> Your most recent pull request had again similar errors, see
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/data-shapes/pull/66/files#diff-68d02e684d9100fc33e1e1ed8c3bc111
> 
> 
> So I had merged them in, tried to run them, but gave up and reverted the
> merge. There is only so much detective work that I am willing to make.
> 
> Feel free to correct the errors and resubmit. Having said this, we are now
> after the original last call date because we are trying to reach a stable
> state in which implementers can submit full coverage. Also, note that the WG
> has complete discretion to approve or reject tests.
> 
> Holger
> 
> 
> 
> On 26/04/2017 1:12, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> I have a bunch of tests that I submitted but were not accepted.
>>
>> peter
>>
>> On 04/19/2017 07:16 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>> The WG is eager to receive people's SHACL test cases, both single-feature unit
>>> tests, and more complex edge cases and real-world examples.  If you have any
>>> of these, please send them along.    See
>>> http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-test-suite/ for details.
>>>
>>> Given the short timeline, the group is going to need to stop accepting
>>> submissions for this round soon.  If you can, please send in your test cases
>>> by *Tuesday, 25 April*.   If this deadline is too soon, please let us know
>>> about your plans, and we'll try to work something out.   Test cases submitted
>>> later will still be helpful to implementors, but will not be used as part of
>>> W3C's Recommendation Track process.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>        -- Sandro  (on behalf of RDF Data Shapes WG)
>>>
>>>
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 27 April 2017 23:55:35 UTC