Rewording POL40001, POL40010 - POL40012 & Revised TA's

["Eric Wells" <eric.wells@hitachisoftware.com>]

All,
    having considered this further I don't think these statements can be
reworded to make them independent of the mechanisms the SCA runtime supports
without changing the semantics. From CD02/PRD:

655 SCA runtimes MUST support at least one of the Direct Attachment and
External Attachment mechanisms
656 for policySet attachment. [POL40010] SCA implementations supporting only
the External Attachment
657 mechanism MUST ignore the policy sets that are applicable via the Direct
Attachment mechanism.
658 [POL40011] SCA implementations supporting only the Direct Attachment
mechanism MUST ignore the
659 policy sets that are applicable via the External Attachment mechanism.
[POL40012] SCA
660 implementations supporting both Direct Attachment and External
Attachment mechanisms MUST ignore
661 policy sets applicable to any given SCA element via the Direct
Attachment mechanism when there exist
662 policy sets applicable to the same SCA element via the External
Attachment mechanism [POL40001]

Therefore I've taken another stab at writing the corresponding Test
Assertions, which are included in the attached MS Word document.

The approach I used is to make the assertions mandatory and use the
prerequisites to qualify which of them apply the SCA runtime under test.
This assumes that the test protocol will ignore (and NOT fail) a test that
does not apply. (This is actually a separate issue and should probably be
raised as such).

I also noticed that the TA's do not cover some situations, such as an SCA
runtime that supports both Direct and External attachment, but only one of
these is used on any given element. I've added TA's to cover these as well.

On a related issue the Test Assertions POL-TA-40005A/B/C use the terminology
"directly applied to the element", which is confusing. In this instance it
is not referring to Direct/External attachment, it means "applied to this
element in the hierarchy and not inherited from other elements". I think
these TA's should be reworded to avoid confusion with the Direct/External
attachment mechanism. However the above is the best I could think of and
that phrase would probably make matter worse! Does anyone have any
suggestions?

Best Regards,
              Eric.
Eric Wells.
Consulting Engineer.
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
San Francisco, CA. USA.
+1 (415) 656-4346
eric.wells@hitachisoftware.com

SCA_Policy_Test_Assertions_EW_June_15.doc