From Linked Data Platform
Revision as of 15:52, 28 January 2013 by Eric (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

1 Test Suite proposals

Reminder: the current deadline for proposals is Nov 26th.

1.1 @@my proposal@@

  • champion: betehess
  • environment/languages/tools to be used
  • concrete examples of tests
  • explain how the actual tests and the English description will be maintained (it was suggested to maintain them in one place if possible)
  • say how tests will be submitted, reviewed, accepted/rejected, added
  • describe how an implementer will be able to test her implementation
  • if available, provide a pointer to some runnable code
  • send an email to public-ldp-wg@w3.org with "[testing] my proposal" as title

1.2 HTTP-in-RDF and EARL

  • HTTP Vocabulary in RDF 1.0
    • Allows description in RDF of HTTP conversations.
    • Test expectations could be formulated as SPARQL ASK queries against such conversations.
  • Evaluation and Report Language (EARL) 1.0
    • Allows description of test suites and recording of test results.
    • Application-specific extensions are needed to state test inputs and expectations if automatic execution is desired.

1.2.1 Example Usage within W3C

There are a number of W3C WG that have been successfully using the RDF Test Metadata and Test Description vocabulary along with EARL for their Test Cases/Test Suites. Typically, a Test Harness is provided that enables implementers to run the tests either online or offline and then submit the resulting EARL document to the WG for producing the Implementation Report. In the following some of these deployments are listed.

1.3 Traceability from use-cases to test cases

(added by steve battle) The UC&R defines a number of user-stories from which many use-cases are derived. Each use-case in turn is fleshed-out by a number of scenarios. It is expected that in turn each scenario will lead to the development of a number of test-cases. The concept of traceability from Use-Cases to test cases ensures that test-cases are well-founded and conversely they help to confirm the completeness of the set of use-cases.

2 manifest test description, EARL results submission

  • champion: ericP
  • Turtle manifest (like SPARQL) with
    • input state
    • operations
    • expected response
    • expected result state
  • results posted in EARL (also like SPARQL)
     mf:action [
         u:graphData [ ut:graph <paging1.ttl> ;
                       rdfs:label "http://example.org/g1" ;
                       :as :LDPContainer ] ; # ×n
     ] ;
     httprdf:PST [ endpoint <bar> ; ut:graph <post1.ttl> ] .
     httprdf:PST [ endpoint <bar> ; ut:graph <response1.ttl> ] .
     mf:final [
         u:graphData [ ut:graph <final1.ttl> ;
                       rdfs:label "http://example.org/g1" ;
                       :as :LDPContainer ] ; # ×n
         u:graphData [ ut:graph <resource1.ttl> ;
                       rdfs:label "http://example.org/rsrc1" ;
                       :as :LDPResource ] ; # ×n
     ] ;
 ] ;