Re: Minutes: JUN-01-2001 WG Teleconference

jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com wrote:
[...]
> error1 I think there should be a test result with 0 triples
>        Maybe an error document should produce 0 triples
>        but there could be an issue here (my first issue?)
>        so I don't (yet) agree with the test result (because
>        there is none)

Jos, could you please be a bit more explicit about what the problem is here.
Do you have a test case in mind.  Why must there be a test result with 0
triples?

[...]
> So my conclusion is that we cannot close this issue before
> we resolve the reification-needed issue (don't shoot the
> messenger)

Of course we won't shoot the messenger :)  Would you like a blindfold?

This is an interesting point to raise.  However, whilst it does affect
the triples output, I think it is an orthogonal issue.  Whether or not
the bag of reified triples is generated in now way affects the other
triples generated.

I'm inclined to suggest that we not let this stop us closing issues,
though we need to note that we may need to revise the result files depending
on the outcome of the #rdfms-reification-required issue.  In the meantime,
I'll see what can be done to move this one forward.

Brian

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 09:54:32 UTC