[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [wsrp] Schaeck 8/26/2002 [WSRP-IMPL]: Thoughts on WSRP Open SourceImplementatation...
This may be something we should have a closer look at ...
Best regards,
Thomas
---------------------- Forwarded by Thomas Schaeck/Germany/IBM on
08/27/2002 09:39 AM ---------------------------
"Monica Martin" <mmartin@certivo.net> on 08/27/2002 05:46:40 AM
To: Thomas Schaeck/Germany/IBM@IBMDE
cc: "Monica Martin" <mmartin@certivo.net>
Subject: Schaeck 8/26/2002 [WSRP-IMPL]: Thoughts on WSRP Open Source
Implementatation...
Please look at the evolving work of (OASIS) ebXML IIC for an XML test
framework using test drivers and services, which could assist in your
development (as its first phase if using ebMS which uses SOAP). In
addition, the OASIS Conformance TC earlier this spring published a
specification on conformance with some guidelines. Several of the ebXML
technical committees have defined the levels and strength of the
conformance rigor.
All thes could be applicable for your efforts, as well as the ongoing
XSLT-Conformance TC.
Thanks.
Monica J. Martin
Drake Certivo, Inc.
208.585.5946
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Schaeck
Sent: Mon 8/26/2002 12:40 PM
To: larry_cable@yahoo.com
Cc: Rudnicki Joseph G CONT NSSC; 'wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org'
Subject: RE: [wsrp] [WSRP-IMPL] Thoughts on WSRP Open Source
Implementatation...
Referring to a statement below - I think an a-priori catalog is
required to
create a complete test suite.
If multiple parties participate in creation of the test suite,
we can then
divide up the implementation of the test cases and have
cross-reviews to
make sure the implementations of the test suite are correct.
I think the spec needs to contain all the MUSTs, MAYs, SHOULDs
and MUST
NOTs to be complete, apart from that the compliance test suite
definition
should be a separate document (that always needs to be kept
exactly in sync
with the spec itself)
Best regards,
Thomas
Larry Cable <larry_cable@yahoo.com> on 08/21/2002 06:07:17 PM
Please respond to larry_cable@yahoo.com
To: Rudnicki Joseph G CONT NSSC <RudnickiJG@NAVSEA.NAVY.MIL>
cc: "'wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org'" <wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE: [wsrp] [WSRP-IMPL] Thoughts on WSRP Open Source
Implementatat ion...
--- Rudnicki Joseph G CONT NSSC
<RudnickiJG@NAVSEA.NAVY.MIL> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am very interested in assuring that WSRP allows
> total "plug and play."
> Anything else will make WSRP similar to early
> versions of CORBA, more of a
> philosopy than an interoperability specification.
>
> Will creating conformance test definitions make it
> easier to assure that
> WSRP is "plug and play?" Often looking at the
> problem from different
> directions assures a more consistent product. This
> would mean that the
> conformance test definitions could both provide a
> basis for WSRP conformance
> tests and provide feedback to the WSRP
> specification.
>
that was my thinking on the matter
> Take care.
>
> Joe Rudnicki
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Cable [ mailto:larry_cable@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 7:53 AM
> To: Alan Kropp; 'Thomas Schaeck'; 'Michael Freedman'
> Cc: 'wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org'
> Subject: RE: [wsrp] [WSRP-IMPL] Thoughts on WSRP
> Open Source
> Implementatat ion...
>
>
>
> --- Alan Kropp <akropp@epicentric.com> wrote:
> > I agree with Thomas. I believe there are
> precedents
> > for the spec
> > implementors also being the compliance suite
> > implementors.
> > In JSR 168, and in fact all JSRs, the spec lead
> (who
> > almost
> > always implements the spec) is also in charge of
> the
> > compliance
> > suite.
> >
> > Given that, can we find a way of sharing the
> > compliance suite
> > implementation across a few TC members, whether or
> > not they are
> > also implementing the spec?
> >
> > Besides the implementation of the compliance
> suite,
> > there are
> > other issues, that the TC needs to decide on, such
> > as:
> > * The process for the TC to validate that the
> > compliance suite
> > is in fact correct
>
> would there be any value in creating a compliance
> test suite definition; essentially a document that
> catalogs (apriori) the set of conformance tests;
> what
> they test, "how", and what the conformant result(s)
> would be?
>
> Although this is certainly "unusual" this could be
> valuable; it could either be a separate document
> or "inline" conformance statements in the spec
> itself
> as long as they did not significantly impact the
> readability of the spec itself.
>
> Rgds
>
> - Larry Cable
>
> > * Are there any penalties for failing the suite,
> or
> > benefits for
> > passing?
> > * Do companies administer the test on themselves?
> > If it is the
> > honor system, what exactly are we expecting to
> get
> > out of it?
> > * If it's not the honor system, what's the process
> > for
> > administering the test: does anyone in specific
> > administer it,
> > how do you schedule a time to do it, do you have
> > to bring any
> > hardware/software to a certain place. This
> would
> > mean there's
> > an ongoing cost to maintaining a compliance
> > program, and are
> > there TC members willing to shoulder it?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Schaeck [ mailto:SCHAECK@de.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 19, 2002 4:30 AM
> > To: Michael Freedman
> > Cc: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: [wsrp] [WSRP-IMPL] Thoughts on WSRP
> > Open Source
> > Implementatat ion...
> >
> >
> >
> > I think that while the validation compliance suite
> > should be done by
> > different people, it dosn't necessarily mean
> > different companies.
> >
> > It would be ok if some companies have teams
> working
> > for implementations for
> > their products and contribute different people,
> e.g.
> > from their QA
> > departments to the compliance suite.
> >
> > Since IBM is already providing significant
> resources
> > for editing the spec
> > and providing a free implementation it would be
> good
> > if other companies
> > contribute resources to work on the compliance
> > suite.
> >
> > One thing we should also consider is something
> like
> > a "plug fest" (hope
> > that's the proper term), i.e. a meeting where
> > different companies bring
> > servers with their portals and WSRP producers and
> we
> > test that they work
> > together properly.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Thomas
> >
> >
> > Michael Freedman <Michael.Freedman@oracle.com> on
> > 08/17/2002 08:52:35 PM
> >
> > To:
> > cc: wsrp@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: Re: [wsrp] [WSRP-IMPL] Thoughts on
> WSRP
> > Open Source
> > Implementatat ion...
> >
> >
> >
> > We should try and find out if there are sufficient
> > members of the TC
> > willing to
> > work on this that aren't also tainted. We are in
> > the same position as IBM
> > in
> > that we are beginning early implementations hence
> > need to disqualify
> > ourselves
> > as well. Who out there isn't planning on
> > implementing a WSRP
> > producer/container over the next 4-6 months and
> > would be willing to work on
> > on
> > a validation/compliance suite?
> >
> > As for calling the Apache work a "reference
> > implementation" I think we
> > need to
> > be careful. WSRP has a variety of usage patterns
> --
> > one of which seems to
> > be
> > the target of this implementation. As "reference
> > implementations" often
> > define/imply a coded version of the specification
> > i.e. the code defines the
> > spec particularly where the spec is unclear -- it
> > seems inappropriate in
> > this
> > situation. Would "sample implementation" be a
> > better term?
> > -Mike-
> >
> >
> > Alan Kropp wrote:
> >
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: < http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: < http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC