[xquery-talk] BumbleBee XQuery Test Harness
jhunter at xquery.com
Wed Oct 15 15:09:10 PDT 2003
Sander Bos wrote:
> I could write and test an adapter for our product (X-Hive/DB) in about
> 1.5 hours, including a little 'hacking' (turns out we read over the
> document -> doc function renaming in the spec), and query adjusting (we
> implement the later 22 August version of the spec). So congratulations
> on such an easy to use product!
Thanks for the props! I'm glad BumbleBee helped you discover a spec
compliance issue in its first day. We'll be adding August tests in the
2003-08 directory before long.
> I will post my adapter class on this
> list once I can run it against a non-obfuscated version of Adapter.
The open Adapter classes are available in the 1.0.1 release, now online.
> With respect to our success percentage, well we have a little work to
> do.... I did look into detail into the usecases tests (also to tune the
> adapter against the test-framework). What I saw is that we had some
> problems with doc(...) as mentioned, maybe we include incorrectly at
> some points (not sure whether that's a bug), so 800.0 instead of 800
Yes, some vendors serialize an xs:double without the .0 but
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#double says this is incorrect and the
.0 is necessary. In the 1.0.1 release we updated a few test results
BTW, you can see what's new in the CHANGES.txt file with the distribution.
> do not implement import schema yet, we include default attributes when
> importing into another constructed element (very probably a bug), and
> then there were a few test failures I could not directly explain (I am
> not one of the XQuery programmers here).
I look forward to everyone reaching 100% compliance on the use cases.
Then we'll be able to expand beyond. The Use Cases themselves cover
just a portion of the full specification.
If people want to contribute tests, we have a "custom" area specifically
for this. You'll see some tests I've written in there.
> I think there is also a bug in the test-framework that causes hundreds
> of tests to fail (596 mentions in the log), we have a lot of results
> Actual Result:
> Expected Possible Result 1:
> Failure Message 1:
> Expected node type '3' but was '1' - comparing <BumbleBee_Result ...>
> true </BumbleBee_Result> at /BumbleBee_Result/text() to
> <results...> at /BumbleBee_Result/results
> I think we produce the result in the right way, so surrounded by a
> results element? But BumbleBee does not like it.
Yes, you are correct. That also is fixed in 1.0.1.
More information about the talk