fix: bugs with `rdflib.extras.infixowl` by aucampia · Pull Request #2390 · RDFLib/rdflib (original) (raw)

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Conversation6 Commits25 Checks0 Files changed

Conversation

This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters

[ Show hidden characters]({{ revealButtonHref }})

Summary of changes

Fix the following issues in rdflib.extras.infixowl:

getting and setting of max cardinality only considered identifiers and not other RDF terms.
The return value of manchesterSyntax was wrong for some cases.
The way that BooleanClass was generating its string representation (i.e. BooleanClass.__repr__) was wrong for some cases.

Other changes:

Added an example for using infixowl to create an ontology.
Updated infixowl tests.
Updated infixowl documentation.

This code is based on code from:

Infixowl fix #2307

Checklist

Checked that there aren't other open pull requests for
the same change.
Added tests for any changes that have a runtime impact.
Checked that all tests and type checking passes.
For changes that have a potential impact on users of this project:
- Updated relevant documentation to avoid inaccuracies.
- Considered adding additional documentation.
- Considered adding an example in ./examples for new features.
Considered granting push permissions to the PR branch,
so maintainers can fix minor issues and keep your PR up to date.

Graham Higgins and others added 24 commits

March 22, 2023 13:50

tidy # docstring syntax and replace antiquated namespace_manager bindings with moderm graph ns bindings.

subject_node_closure and blank_node_closure don't have tests and are not essential to the rest of the PR. Removing them so the rest can be merged.

Removing this would be a breaking change, it should be marked as deprecated instead and if it is being replaced by another function then it should call the other function.

This will invalidate the xfail if the exception being raised changes, which makes it a bit safer to use xfail, as it is less likely to mask other newly introduced bugs.