- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:24:54 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org, Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu>
Here I understand Yosi coded up cwm's SPARQL implementation with special SPARQL-compatible builtins written so as to match the spec. That doesn't mean that the spec is right or sensible or logical. :-) Tim On Aug 8, 2005, at 15:03, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 13:42 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > >> FYI, there's another test case available to study: >> >> Roman numeral test Dave Beckett (Monday, 8 August) >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/ >> 0228.html >> >> -> >> >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.rq >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman.n3 >> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/tests/data/ValueTesting/roman- >> result.n3 >> >> >> Yosi, if you could look at that soon, I'd appreciate it. >> > > I just looked at it with that cwm sparql server on mr-burns, yosi. > > It gives 0 results, which agrees with the last call design > (and disagrees with the roman-results.n3 sketch). > > TimBL, can you confirm that cwm is giving 0 results by design? > > > >> The valueTesting issue (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/DataAccess/ >> issues#valueTesting ) >> is on the agenda for tomorrow's teleconference, and it would >> be nice to have input from the cwm/swap project in hand. >> > [...] > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E >
Received on Wednesday, 10 August 2005 13:25:51 UTC