- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 14:07:56 +0000
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Taking the manifest and tests from: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/Manifest.rdf and running against the latest CVS version of my RDF/XML parser, Raptor (there are still some bugs in it from these tests, they are noted below). Ignored Obsolete Tests: URL http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/Manifest.rdf#test005 Ignoring Miscellaneous Tests: URL http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-uri-substructure/Manifest.rdf#error001 Parser tests found: Positive: 156 Negative: 57 APPROVED parser tests found: Positive: 133 Negative: 29 Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#test0007 failed Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#test0008 FAILED - N-Triples match failed These are obsolete - they contain aboutEach / aboutEachPrefix in them. Please delete them. I'm still working on rdf:bagID implementation in my parser, however I currently get a failure on: Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-nested-bagIDs/Manifest.rdf#test007 FAILED Error - URI http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-nested-bagIDs/test007.rdf:25 - rdf:bagID is forbidden on property element prop with an rdf:resource or rdf:parseType attribute. and that is correct from my reading of the syntax, you can't this: <some:prop rdf:resource="rel#uriRef" rdf:bagID="bag" some:propAttr="val"/> so this test case is in error. Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-nested-bagIDs/Manifest.rdf#test010b FAILED - N-Triples match failed Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-nested-bagIDs/Manifest.rdf#test011a FAILED - N-Triples match failed Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-nested-bagIDs/Manifest.rdf#test012b FAILED - N-Triples match failed These fail due to the way the tests are encoded in the manifest. test01a, 011b and 012a work correctly, since they are the alternate n-triples results for the given rdf/xml. I would rather that the manifest listed a positive parser test with 1 rdf/xml file and 1 or more n-triples results; rather than have multiple tests. Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr/Manifest.rdf#test003 FAILED - N-Triples match failed This is due to the value of an empty literal property element. We have decided that <ex:prop></ex:prop> or it's xml equivalent <ex:prop/> gives an empty literal string result. This test assumes that it gives a bnode. (Aside: ARP also follows this error test case). Please fix the n-triples: -_:j88096 <http://example.org/prop1> _:j88097 . +_:j88096 <http://example.org/prop1> "" . See http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#emptyPropertyElt first bullet point. Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces/Manifest.rdf#test001 FAILED - N-Triples match failed Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-xml-literal-namespaces/Manifest.rdf#test002 FAILED - N-Triples match failed These are XML canonicalization errors probably on my part. This is going to be very hard for people to check. No error. Positive Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/Manifest.rdf#test005 FAILED - N-Triples match failed Error - URI http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/test005.rdf:19 - Document element rdf:RDF missing. This is not RDF/XML, please obsolete this test. Results for Positive Parser Tests BAD 10 6.41% OK 146 93.58% TOTAL 156 100.00% (noting that there are really 3 tests overlapped, the ones with alternate answers) For the negative tests, I'm still working on checking them. I currently have these unchecked cases: Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-charmod-literals/Manifest.rdf#error001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-charmod-literals/Manifest.rdf#error002 SUCCEEDED, should have failed Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-charmod-uris/Manifest.rdf#error001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed These are charmod-or IRI-related tests, but we are no long normative on either. These should be reviewed. What are the normalization requirements on something transforming rdf/xml to an rdf graph? The concepts doc mentions NFC, but the XML syntax doc never does. It seems to require an immense amount of code to support (even the Java Jar file is megabytes) and looks unlikely I'll be getting round to it anytime soon. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/Manifest.rdf#error001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed My bug. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#error0001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed This uses a bare 'about' attribute. This is no longer an error, please obsolete and/or convert to a positive test case. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#error0002 SUCCEEDED, should have failed This uses a bare 'bagID' attribute. This is no longer an error, please obsolete and/or convert to a positive test case. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#error0003 SUCCEEDED, should have failed This uses a bare 'resource' attribute. This is no longer an error, please obsolete and/or convert to a positive test case. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#error0004 SUCCEEDED, should have failed This uses a bare 'ID' attribute. This is no longer an error, please obsolete and/or convert to a positive test case. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/Manifest.rdf#error0005 SUCCEEDED, should have failed This uses a bare 'parseType' attribute. This is no longer an error, please obsolete and/or convert to a positive test case. Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-empty-property-elements/Manifest.rdf#error001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-empty-property-elements/Manifest.rdf#error002 SUCCEEDED, should have failed Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-empty-property-elements/Manifest.rdf#error003 SUCCEEDED, should have failed Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-syntax-incomplete/Manifest.rdf#error006 SUCCEEDED, should have failed My bugs Negative Test http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/Manifest.rdf#error001 SUCCEEDED, should have failed The N-Triple Raptor returned was: <mailto:relfile> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://example.org/type> . [[ Description: xml:base must be in generic syntax for resolution of relative URI. ]] -- http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/xmlbase/error001.rdf I can't see how to test this without knowledge of the specific URI scheme here, 'mailto' and that it is not hierarchical. The URI should be changed to 'example:blah' unless there is something about the mailto scheme that requires this. Results for Negative Parser Tests BAD 14 24.56% OK 43 75.43% TOTAL 57 100.00%
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 09:08:52 UTC