- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:06:28 -0400
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- CC: 'W3C RDF WG' <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
On 04/04/2013 06:40 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote: > On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:08 AM, Sandro Hawke wrote: > >>> Yeah.. The only other thing I'm aware of is the link to the test >>> suite. Currently it points to http://json-ld.org/test-suite/. Shall >>> I change that to http://www.w3.org/2013/json-ld-tests/ as we've >>> discussed? I just checked. It's not setup yet. >> I think so. Before setting it up, I was waiting to hear feedback on >> the URL (eg json-ld/test-suite). If I proxy that to >> https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/tree/master/test-suite we get >> individual test URLs that look like: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2013/json-ld-tests/tests/compact-0001-context.jsonld >> >> I'm wondering about getting that "/tests" out of there. Hard to do, >> though. Whatever. > I assumed that we will need to freeze the test suite anyway at some point. > So it shouldn't be a problem to eliminate that unnecessary sub-directory. > > We can change that redirection/proxy at any point, right? So probably we'll > just create another directory official-w3c-tests or something and move > everything that was approved there. For the time being, using what we > currently have should be enough and allows me to change the link. Turns out I can't really proxy for github because it does redirects, or something. So, instead I made a landing page which explains the situation (for now). I put it on the wiki, so feel free to edit. > >> Also, I see the test suite says it's maintained as a free-for-all. >> That's probably not appropriate, at least while we're going through CR >> (or an LC that might also be a CR). > Right. I think it makes sense to have an official, frozen test suite (under > the req. W3C license) and a place where we collect new tests even after > going to REC. > > >> I suggest that we start to add to the manifests entries like >> "approved": "http://www.w3.org/2013/04/04-rdf-wg-irc#T21-59-26" >> >> ... for any test which has been approved by the RDF WG. (which might >> be a whole bunch at once.) > That's another option but it might become problematic when tests are > changed/extended etc. I prefer to freeze the official test and to not touch > them anymore :-) Well, history suggests we will have to keep touching them. There's no need to ever modify a test in place though; just approve/reject them. Some test suites also have EXTRACREDIT tests, for optional features. >> This way we don't really need much access control -- anyone can see if >> the test has been modified since being approved, and check whether it >> was actually approved by following that link. >> >> Then, to exit CR, we'll need people to be passing "approved" tests. >> This should be explained in the README. >> >> We should also tell people how to submit their test results, and where >> the table of everyone's test results is. > Gregg is already working on that: > > https://github.com/json-ld/json-ld.org/issues/229 I assumed he would. :-) Other things I observe about the test suite that might be problems: - there's no way to test for extra triples being generated by JSON->RDF - there's no way to test RDF->JSON - there are frame and normalize tests, but I have no idea what those are (since that's not in the spec any more) Yes? -- Sandro > >> Yeah, let's add that text and see how it goes. > OK, cool. > > > Cheers, > Markus > > > > -- > Markus Lanthaler > @markuslanthaler > >
Received on Friday, 5 April 2013 12:06:39 UTC