Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
To PR
This page is for the SPARQL WG to record issues to be resolved and tasks to be completed before documents are ready for going to Proposed Recommendation.
Contents
Overall PR/final editing requirements
- Do we still need to align style for "must, must not, should, should not, may and recommended" RFC2119 terms across documents? cf. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2011AprJun/0050.html
- Remove all "red boxes"
- set review period as soon as pub date is fixed.
- mark as PR
- Do we have to remove all "AT RISK" marks? (Axel: I understand that this can only remain during CR, so if we skip CR, I guess we have to make a decision)
- Any process-wise necessary Template text for PR?
- List W3C members we can ask for endorsement during PR review phase
- contact RDF WG for official reviews before we go to PR (with LC publication of query?)
Test Suite
- All test cases approved and passed by two independend implementations
- Test suite README.html document in place and ready
Query (PR)
3LC: 24 July 2012 until 21 August 2012.
Document: Editors working draft
LC Reviews
- Birte to review BIND/VALUES
- Paul to review property paths -- Done
- Matt to review function changes -- Done
Comments
- Andy: 5 open comments; 3 on bindings, 1 on prefixed names, 1 on VALUES word [DONE]
Issues
- Formally accept VALUES changes.
- Check scope text (Axel)
- Algebra generation for BIND needs sorting out [DONE]
- Nested Aggregates
- Grammar note saying "it's illegal to nest aggregate in expressions"
- ?? a note at the end of aggregates ("11.5 Aggregate Example (with errors)") for SELECT Expressions and aggregates assigned to vars (Steve)
- Should IRIREF include UCHAR? (no - \u does earlier in SPARQL for compatibility with SPARQL 1.0)
- Populate the function namespace page ACTION-389.
"At Risk" Boxes
- Use of rdf:LangString (17.4.2.7 datatype)
- Converting Graph Patterns (simplification) (18.2.2 Converting Graph Patterns)
- Misc Turtle alignment (19 SPARQL Grammar)
Editorial Tasks
- Axel: in-scope definition fix
- Andy: fix / cleanup references
- Andy: remove at-risk box in grammar (requires group decision)
- Steve: 18.5.1: "solutions containing error values are removed at projection time." -- does not reflect that it's bindings that are errors leave the variable unbound but the solution (i.e. row) remains.
- SAMPLE returns RDFTerm not literal [DONE]
- Steve: Define MIN, MAX, SAMPLE of empty set (to be error) [DONE]
- Andy: STRBEFORE/STRAFTER changes related to error condition [DONE]
Implementation Reports/Tests (for PR only)
- Lee to draft syntax tests for at-risk grammar features
- UUID tests not approved
- Greg: Changes to STRBEFORE/STRAFTER or new tests
- Are there reports of two independent implementations passing all related test cases?
- 8 BIND-scope test cases: 2012AprJun/0168 (see issues)
Update (PR)
PR Reviews
Comments
- Kjetil's comment on blank nodes and RDF merge - DONE
- comments DB-27, DB-26, DB-5 - DONE
Issues
- Questions on bnode reuse (syntax) across QuadPatterns in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0163.html
- Questions on bnode correlation (semantics) across named graphs in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0163.html
- ACTION-642
- prepare list of changes since LC
Editorial Tasks
- check again changes as per ACTION-585
- Make editorial changes as per ACTION-644
- Editorial changes as per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012JulSep/0019.html - DONE
Implementation Reports/Tests
- All tests approved
- We have 3 passing implementations of everything
- request for approval of 2 new test cases:
Protocol (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Comments
- Lee to draft response to RC-1, RC-2, MLR-1
Editorial Tasks
- Fix 2.2.2 to note that UTF-8 is the charset there
Implementation Reports/Tests
- ACTION-628
- ACTION-629
- ACTION-630
- ACTION-631
- Expect test passage from Fuseki, RDF::Query
Service Description (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Comments
- All comments have been responded to; pinged 3 commenters where we don't have final acknowledgement
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Validator tests basic SD conformance
- ACTION-632
- ACTION-633
- ACTION-634
- RDF::Query passes the tests; Chimezie has basic implementation & will try out; Steve has an out of date impl that might be updated
Graph Store HTTP Protocol (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
PR Reviews
- No changes made since LC publication, except removed refs to REST
- Review pending: Axel (ACTION-645) this review is not critical path (since there are no significant changes in the doc, decided in Telco 2012-07-03 that no more full review was needed)
Comments
- JL-3, JL-4
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Test case coverage?
- Are there reports of two independent implementations passing all related test cases?
Entailment (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Comments
- No, just some ACKs missing from Michael Schneider
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Test case coverage still weak
- No reports yet, ACTION-637 to ask candidate implementors
Federated Query (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Comments
Editorial Tasks
- Any Open Editorial tasks?
Change BINDINGS for VALUES
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Test case coverage? Missing tests, ACTION-520
- Are there reports of two independent implementations passing all related test cases?
JSON Results (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Document: Editors working draft
no changes since last version, no reviews needed.
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Test case coverage?
- Are there reports of two independent implementations passing all related test cases?
CSV-TSV Results Format (PR)
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Document: Editors working draft
Implementation Reports/Tests
- Test case coverage?
- Are there reports of two independent implementations passing all related test cases?
Reviews
- chime (ACTION-647) (non critical path, since no changes since LC and no critical comments)
Overview document
FINISHED (i.e. no more full review needed - No significant changes since last call), except the following coments and minor issues:
Editorial Tasks
- Remove ref to REST in GSP section: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2012AprJun/0218.html - DONE (ACTION-657)