# tests, input \[was Time frame for completion of CSL 1.0?\]

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [December 3, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797 "2009-12-03T14:31:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 7\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/1 "2009-12-03T14:31:41Z")

</div>

Hi Andrea; good to hear from you.

> > I don’t think we’ve set a revised target for the completion of CSL 1.0.
> > 
> > Shall we do that?
> 
> Just to let you know that I started working on the Haskell  
> implementation again, after a long stop. I’m finishing with the  
> implementation of everything needed by the test suite

Great news!

> - BTW, Frank,  
> you did really a great job!
> 
> When the tests will be working (very soon since I just need to write  
> the HTML formatter for the output, now) I’ll update everything and  
> implement what’s still missing. So, if we set a target I’ll try to  
> comply with it.

So how are you actually integrating the tests? Is the “HTML formatter”  
you mention specifically just for testing purposes?

I ask because Ive not yet dealt with integrating the tests in my  
Python code, in part because I don’t feel I need them yet, and in part  
because of the previously-mentioned fact that I’m using an internal  
HTML + RDFa representation that it very different than the output in  
the test suite, and so am not quite sure how to proceed. I guess I’m  
thinking one way to address this is to write an “HTML-test” output  
mode.

> Just a question: is the “input” array in the JSON test object meant to  
> be a reference API, for instance with regards to name structures? The  
> citations object could be a reference API too, for citation prefixes,  
> modifiers and locators. I saw a thread above about something like  
> this, but I must confess that catching up with the discussions of the  
> last 6 month is hard… 😉

The answer to your first question is “no, not really” but that we do  
need to do something about this. I had started working on an XML  
schema (which I think I committed) called csl-data.rnc whose purpose  
is to be a formalization of the input expectations for CSL. Is there  
interest in finishing this and including it in 1.0 final?

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 2:43pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/2 "2009-12-03T14:43:26Z")

</div>

FWIW. it’s here:

[http://bitbucket.org/bdarcus/csl-schema/src/tip/csl-data.rnc](http://bitbucket.org/bdarcus/csl-schema/src/tip/csl-data.rnc)

Part of my hesitation is I don’t want to introduce another data  
format, and just intend it to be informational.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rintze\_Zelle](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/rintze_zelle/32/175_2.png) [@Rintze\_Zelle](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Rintze_Zelle)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 3:46pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/3 "2009-12-03T15:46:35Z")

</div>

If JSON is going to be the leading format, maybe this will be useful:  
[http://json-schema.org/](http://json-schema.org/)  
It probably won’t be possible to link into the rest of the CSL-schema (e.g.  
to include the allowed variables and such), but that might be a relatively  
small price to pay.

Rintze

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Robert\_Knight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ba9def/32.png) [@Robert\_Knight](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Robert_Knight)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/4 "2009-12-03T16:00:06Z")

</div>

> FWIW. it’s here:  
> [http://bitbucket.org/bdarcus/csl-schema/src/tip/csl-data.rnc](http://bitbucket.org/bdarcus/csl-schema/src/tip/csl-data.rnc)  
> Part of my hesitation is I don’t want to introduce another data  
> format, and just intend it to be informational.

Is this intended for interchange between applications or just for  
formatting data for input to a CSL processor?

Regards,  
Robert.2009/12/3 Rintze Zelle \<@Rintze\_Zelle\>:

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andrea\_Rossato1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@Andrea\_Rossato1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Andrea_Rossato1)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/5 "2009-12-03T17:08:14Z")

</div>

> > When the tests will be working (very soon since I just need to write  
> > the HTML formatter for the output, now) I’ll update everything and  
> > implement what’s still missing. So, if we set a target I’ll try to  
> > comply with it.
> 
> So how are you actually integrating the tests? Is the “HTML formatter”  
> you mention specifically just for testing purposes?
> 
> I ask because Ive not yet dealt with integrating the tests in my  
> Python code, in part because I don’t feel I need them yet, and in part  
> because of the previously-mentioned fact that I’m using an internal  
> HTML + RDFa representation that it very different than the output in  
> the test suite, and so am not quite sure how to proceed. I guess I’m  
> thinking one way to address this is to write an “HTML-test” output  
> mode.

Yes, the testsuite will be integrated and the HTML output will be a  
very simple filter to produce the expected test result.

I think integrating the test-suite may have some benefits: a common  
and standard way of testing new proposal and a way of verifying the  
implementations’ compliance.

Moreover I need the tests for updating citeproc-hs, disambiguation and  
collapsing particularly.

> The answer to your first question is “no, not really” but that we do  
> need to do something about this. I had started working on an XML  
> schema (which I think I committed) called csl-data.rnc whose purpose  
> is to be a formalization of the input expectations for CSL. Is there  
> interest in finishing this and including it in 1.0 final?

I don’t think something like this is needed for 1.0 final and the  
input expectation can be derived by the list of variables - that’s the  
JSON object I expect to be the input. But when we need further details  
which have consequences in terms of implementation - like with names  
and dates - I think we should or could use common metadata.

Am I right when I remember some discussion about JSON/RDF (maybe that  
was on the bibo ML)? Would it make any sense to reuse the  
bibliographic ontology (for me that would be a good reason to write an  
RDF parser for my Reference type)?

Andrea

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 8:42pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/6 "2009-12-03T20:42:35Z")

</div>

Either the latter, or another possibility: a way to document the data  
expectations. For that, we could also just use plain text in the  
documentation.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/tests-input-was-time-frame-for-completion-of-csl-1-0/797/7 "2009-12-03T20:50:14Z")

</div>

…

> > The answer to your first question is “no, not really” but that we do  
> > need to do something about this. I had started working on an XML  
> > schema (which I think I committed) called csl-data.rnc whose purpose  
> > is to be a formalization of the input expectations for CSL. Is there  
> > interest in finishing this and including it in 1.0 final?
> 
> I don’t think something like this is needed for 1.0 final and the  
> input expectation can be derived by the list of variables - that’s the  
> JSON object I expect to be the input. But when we need further details  
> which have consequences in terms of implementation - like with names  
> and dates - I think we should or could use common metadata.

Yes, this was mostly prompted by three primary issues: names, dates,  
and rich text content. This is all easy to represent in XML and in  
RNG.

> Am I right when I remember some discussion about JSON/RDF (maybe that  
> was on the bibo ML)? Would it make any sense to reuse the  
> bibliographic ontology (for me that would be a good reason to write an  
> RDF parser for my Reference type)?

Yeah, discussion on BIBO takes place on the google group for that. I  
do recall discussing JSON, but don’t remember the details. In this,  
I’m floating the idea of some idiomatic JSON that could be easily  
converted to/from BIBO RDF:

[http://groups.google.com/group/bibliographic-ontology-specification-group/browse\_frm/thread/317ebdd12f7aa4b1/b025bec678a4a87c?lnk=gst&q=json#b025bec678a4a87c](http://groups.google.com/group/bibliographic-ontology-specification-group/browse_frm/thread/317ebdd12f7aa4b1/b025bec678a4a87c?lnk=gst&q=json#b025bec678a4a87c)

But it was just an idea.

Typically RDF tools have an internal model, and then they write  
parsers and sterilizers for different formats (RDFXML, turtle, n3,  
Trix, JSON\*, etc.).

Bruce

- Though the generic JSON they use is more verbose than JSON typically is.