[Feature Request] Test Cases for RO-Crate Export with Fixed Output

[floWetzels]

At the moment, all RO-Crate tests only check whether exporting and then importing an ARC yields the original object. Such a test case misses certain types of code changes, e.g. editing the context semantically does not result tests failing.

I suggest there should be at least one test case checking the export of a specific ARC or Investigation against a fixed json string. Such objects already exist in the code base, e.g. in tests/TestingUtils/TestObjects.ROCrate/[email protected]. However, no test uses this file.

[HLWeil]

Was actually wondering a bit why no tests are failing after the big changes in #496.

Now the question is how we actually continue from here. Should we create a test file based on the ARCPrototype? E.g. writing the file using the current implementation and then manually control it?

[Freymaurer]

You could write .NET only tests checking against json schema?

[HLWeil]

Yes! Json schema won't be enough though but there is an RO-Crate validator.

The current plan would be to have an additional CI-job which would roughly look like this:

• Requirements

  • .NET installed
  • RO-Crate Validator installed

• Steps

  • Build ARCtrl
  • Download ArcPrototype
  • Read ARC and Write to RO-Crate
  • Validate using RO-Crate Validator

[floWetzels]

I think using the rocrate-validator for basic validation is a good idea. In the future, we can also validate against the ARC profiles, when they are implemented. But I think having a baseline metadata file for a full ARC is also a good idea.

E.g. writing the file using the current implementation and then manually control it?

@HLWeil Which current version do you mean? The one before the refactoring?

[HLWeil]

@HLWeil Which current version do you mean? The one before the refactoring?

That probably won't be of much help, as quite a few fields have changed. I'd say we double/triple check the current output manually and take that.