tag message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Comment on Section 4.7 "The Case of Multiple Specifications"
- From: "Jacques R. Durand" <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>
- To: "TAG TC" <tag@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:31:40 -0700
Issue: Section 4.7 seems to focus on
the case of "multiple specifications" but really its content is about using
higher-level statements (conformance) in TAs. It is relevant even when dealing
with a single specification that defines different conformance profiles or
high-level properties that cover several normative
statements.
Proposal:
The title of this
section 4.7 "The Case of Multiple Specifications" may not be well-chosen: the
section is
really about TAs making higher level statements (conformance statements) in
their Predicate or Prerequisite.
These conformance
statements could refer to other specifications ("multiple specs") but not
necessarily: it could be several conf profiles from the same big
specification.
- Title could
refocus on the Test Assertion itself by saying: "Higher-Level test Assertions",
because such TAs
address or refer to entire conformance statements (either to an external spec,
or just a conformance profile to the current spec), not just a simple normative
statement.
- The section could
mention the possibility to refer to other test assertions inside the
Predicate (not just in the Prerequisite):
e.g. a "high-level"
TA can have a Predicate that says: (TA1 AND TA2 AND (TA3 OR TA4)) . Such a TA
can address a conformance
profile, when such a
profile can be defined by test assertions. The other possibility - the only
one we describe currently - is to make an abstract conformance
statement in the Predicate (but this only works if such a conformance statement
is already well-defined... and sometimes precisely it is defined by a high-level
expression over the outcome of several TAs).
- The section can
make the link with the "Test Assertions for Properties" section 4.3, showing how
a complex property (often indistinguishable from a conformance profile) can be
defined by a [higher-level] TA, in complex cases where several TAs are
needed.
See my email 8/4: we
could illustrate in 4.7 the case where "medium-size" is defined by a separate TA
that refers two low-level TAs - one on widget weight, one on widget
size.
Regards,
Jacques
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]