- From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 11:24:17 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Jeremy Carroll wrote: [...] > If we were to extend the test cases with different paradigms I would > suggest: > + the paradigm should be clear. > + there should be no need to read a readme to understand a particular > test > + the different paradigms should be different top-level directories. Right, I see what you mean. You want an automatic way to determine what sort of test to run on the data. > > e.g. we copy all the current tests into a directory "syntax" leaving the > internal structure unchanged, There is a rule that we don't create broken URI's so I'm relucant to move the existing test cases. But I'm sure we can work around that. > Another paradigm I proposed earlier was "equality" where each test > consisted of two or more RDF/XML files that contain the same model. I > saw this as useful for testing xml:lang, which does not occur in > N-triples. Yet? Am I right in assuming that the current direction the literal discussion is taking will require a change to the representation of literals in n-triples? Brian
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2001 06:28:13 UTC