Possible problem with Create Term Definition algorithm on compact IRI terms

[kasei]

Based on test t0025, I believe that Create Term Definition, step 16.5 is wrong.

Processing any term at this point with the syntactic form of a compact IRI will fail with a 'cyclic IRI mapping' error after calling IRI expansion, which then calls (in step 3) Create Term Definition again.

I notice that setting defined[term] to true in 16.5 immediately before calling IRI expansion resolves the issue for this particular test, but I do not know what the implications are for possible impact elsewhere in the spec and/or testsuite.

[gkellogg]

Looking at my code, it doesn't pass either local context or defined to Create Term Definition and passes the tests, but can potentially lead to a case where term hasn't yet been defined, so your solution would seem to be correct.

[iherman]

This issue was discussed in a meeting.

• RESOLVED: Add to Create Term Definition 16.5 that defined should be set to True, and that it should be resolved as vocabulary relative by adding the appropriate parameter

View the transcript

Create Term Definition 16.5 should set defined?
Rob Sanderson: #245
Gregg Kellogg: when a term has the form of a CURIE, it is possible that the prefix has not yet been defined
… so we recursively call “expand IRI”;
… we keep track of defined terms, this should be updated accordingly
… also, we should have that it should be resolved against the vocabulary
Proposed resolution: Add to Create Term Definition 16.5 that defined should be set to True, and that it should be resolved as vocabulary relative by adding the appropriate parameter (Rob Sanderson)
Gregg Kellogg: +1
Rob Sanderson: +1
Benjamin Young: +1
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1
Ivan Herman: +1
Harold Solbrig: +1
Tim Cole: +1
Resolution #7: Add to Create Term Definition 16.5 that defined should be set to True, and that it should be resolved as vocabulary relative by adding the appropriate parameter

[gkellogg]

@kasei, please let us know if changes in #251 satisfactorily address your concern.

[kasei]

Looks good, thanks.

[iherman]

This issue was discussed in a meeting.

• RESOLVED: Close completed editorial issues API#242, #243, #244, #245, #246

View the transcript

Close editorial issues
Proposed resolution: Close completed editorial issues API#242, #243, #244, #245, #246 (Rob Sanderson)
Ruben Taelman: +1
Gregg Kellogg: +1
Ivan Herman: +1
Pierre-Antoine Champin: +1
Jeff Mixter: +1
Tim Cole: +1
Rob Sanderson: +1
Adam Soroka: +1
Resolution #9: Close completed editorial issues API#242, #243, #244, #245, #246