- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 09:15:03 +0100
- To: SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 05/04/11 02:16, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> On 4/4/2011 9:02 PM, Gregory Williams wrote:
>> On Apr 4, 2011, at 8:28 PM, Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks, Matt!
>>>
>>> It would be great if people can try these out (Greg, Andy, Olivier,
>>> ...?) so that we can approve these tomorrow if OK.
ARQ passes pp34 and pp35 (path-ng-01.rq and path-ng-02.rq)
>>
>> I pass the new tests, but as Andy and I have discussed on irc, I think
>> we approved some other pp tests last week that are actually wrong, so
>> we should revisit that at some point.
>
> Could you let us know which ones those are?
pp29
Got: 5
# i.e. what we now think is right:
------
| s |
======
| :a |
| :a |
| :c |
| :a |
| :c |
------
Expected: 4
# i.e. what the test has
------
| s |
======
| :c |
| :a |
| :a |
| :a |
------
ARQ had a bug in this evaluator in that it was expanding {2,} backwards
(the "2" at the tail of the path not the head). This test has a
grounded tail and variable head which triggered the bug.
Andy
>
> thanks,
> Lee
>
>>
>> thanks,
>> .greg
>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2011 08:15:37 UTC