SPARQL Protocol query_multiple_dataset

[gkellogg]

It seems to me that this test as a small problem. The query uses a FROM directive, which is overridden using default-graph-uri, but that loads data2.rdf. Either the query should be to <data2.rdf> (or presumably it's absolute URL form), or it should expect false instead of true. Or is do I have some misunderstanding on what the success criteria are for these tests?

rdf-tests/sparql11/data-sparql11/protocol/manifest.ttl

Lines 184 to 206 in 43b0eb9

	:query_multiple_dataset rdf:type mf:ProtocolTest ;
	mf:name "query specifying dataset in both query string and protocol; test for use of protocol-specified dataset" ;
	rdfs:comment """
	#### Request
	POST /sparql/?default-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fkasei.us%2F2009%2F09%2Fsparql%2Fdata%2Fdata2.rdf HTTP/1.1
	Host: www.example
	User-agent: sparql-client/0.1
	Content-Type: application/sparql-query
	Content-Length: XXX
	ASK FROM <http://kasei.us/2009/09/sparql/data/data1.rdf> { <data1.rdf> ?p ?o }
	#### Response
	2xx or 3xx response
	Content-Type: application/sparql-results+xml or application/sparql-results+json
	true
	""" ;
	dawgt:approval dawgt:Approved ;
	dawgt:approvedBy <http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/meeting/2012-11-20#resolution_3> ;
	.

cc/ @kasei

[kasei]

@gkellogg – It looks to me like you had pulled the details of these tests from the HTML file in my sparql11-protocolvalidator repository into the manifest and HTML files in this repository. Is that right?

I think this particular issue stems from the original HTML description in my repo not matching the ]actual implemented test case](https://github.com/kasei/sparql11-protocolvalidator/blob/master/protocol_validator.cgi#L1106-L1111) (which sets up the dataset with two named graphs, and then queries over both of them). So an error on my part in ensuring the README matched the code, but not, I think, an issue with the actual test or what was approved in the WG.

[gkellogg]

@gkellogg – It looks to me like you had pulled the details of these tests from the HTML file in my sparql11-protocolvalidator repository into the manifest and HTML files in this repository. Is that right?

They're from the manifest.ttl I cited above. It did look like I pulled that in in ea232ca and 6fc9e81 from kasei/sparql11-protocolvalidator@1ce0201. back in 2016. It looks like at least that portion of the protocol validator README remains unchanged, but the corresponding CGI entry is indeed rather different.

I think this particular issue stems from the original HTML description in my repo not matching the ]actual implemented test case](https://github.com/kasei/sparql11-protocolvalidator/blob/master/protocol_validator.cgi#L1106-L1111) (which sets up the dataset with two named graphs, and then queries over both of them). So an error on my part in ensuring the README matched the code, but not, I think, an issue with the actual test or what was approved in the WG.

Sounds like I should go over the CGI and make sure it's consistent with what's in the manifest/index and do a PR. I presume that the CGI accurately reflects the WG's intentions.

(My own test harness interprets the manifest comment to run through the tests using Rack::Test.)

[kasei]

Sounds like I should go over the CGI and make sure it's consistent with what's in the manifest/index and do a PR. I presume that the CGI accurately reflects the WG's intentions.

That's my expectation, although both the code and the mistaken README content predate the WG approval in November 2012. My recollection is that the code was driving the conversation since several implementors in the WG (myself included) were all running it to converge on approval.

[gkellogg]

@kasei please have a look at #79, which is an extensive rewrite of the protocol manifest based on your CGI script.