Re: proposed test cases to document current behaviour of EXISTS in SPARQL

See https://github.com/w3c/rdf-tests/issues/42

peter


On 06/17/2016 11:38 PM, james anderson wrote:
> good morning;
> 
> 
>> On 2016-06-18, at 01:31, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com
>> <mailto:pfpschneider@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> EXISTS in SPARQL has quite a number of problems.  The substitution that it
>> is based on results in suspect constructs in the SPARQL algebra and
>> counter-intuitive results.  There are known differences in implementations
>> of EXISTS for common situations.
>>
>> Here are a number of proposed test cases for EXISTS with their current
>> status as per the SPARQL 1.1 Query specification and with suggestions on
>> what should be changed to fix EXISTS.  I'm willing to transform these into
>> the syntax of the test case suite if that is going to produce an effect.
> 
> the general practice has been to fork the repository, implement the tests in a
> branch and open an issue on the topic.
> the last perhaps in parallel and/or in connection with a pull request.
> 
> they should include the dataset content.
> 
> that way others can take the tests, run them and report on their experience.
> 
>> However, one problem is that some of the test cases produce internal
>> constructs that are semantically ill-formed but that do not end up in the
>> final output.  I don't know whether the test suite can describe this
>> situation.
> 
> if those would violate some constraint in an internal data model which causes
> the test to fail, then they would be negative tests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> james anderson | james@dydra.com <mailto:james@dydra.com> | http://dydra.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 18 June 2016 22:40:22 UTC