Conversation
| - `pos_005` - multiple frames (3), repeated terms across frames. Prefix table enabled. | ||
|
|
||
| -`neg_001` - single frame, a "triple" row is in the stream. | ||
| -`neg_002` - single frame, a "graph_start" row is in the stream. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please also add a test case for graph_end like this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
done, now it is neg_003
|
|
||
| -`neg_001` - single frame, a "triple" row is in the stream. | ||
| -`neg_002` - single frame, a "graph_start" row is in the stream. | ||
| -`neg_003` - single frame, graph label is a literal when generalized_statements=false. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm confused, which part of the spec does this check?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is the:
PHYSICAL_STREAM_TYPE_QUADS (2) – stream of RDF quad statements (same as simple statements in N-Quads). In this case, the stream MUST NOT contain RdfStreamRow messages with the triple, graph_start, or graph_end fields set.
and
generalized_statements (3) – whether the stream contains generalized RDF triples or graphs. This field MUST be set to true if the stream contains generalized RDF triples or graphs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, neg_001 and 002 are clear, but 003 – ?
Again, I'm not sure if this is the responsibility of the consumer to validate this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if we follow the logic of the producer, then this test just moves to the rdf_generalized folders and becomes a positive one (option is set and the data has generalized statements), and we do not check for violations of this logic in other scenarios
is it okay?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yup! I don't really see any other sensible way to test this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
cool, thanks for clarification :) I added a graph_end test instead of the one with generalized statements, pls take a look
Relates to #39
Implements test cases for the QUADS 1.1 for consumer: