- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 16:39:21 +0100
- To: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: barstow@w3.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Brian wrote: > 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? Well I was actually meaning that we *could* have an error1.n3 file in the testcase suite and that that file *could* contain no triples. The broader issue here is when you have a "nesting" (to use Pat's new term) supposed to contain triples and there is a 'syntactic problem' then WHAT is going to be in e.g. an engine's memory? Craching is definitely out of question and exception reporting/logging is obvious, but what is the exception handling supposed to be. I hope to have made clear that 'no container' is not the same as an 'empty container'. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jun/att-0000/25-error1.rdf is a testcase to start with. (and sorry to have been so implicit (again)) [...] > 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. I have no problem to live with that. -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 11:03:26 UTC