[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebxml-iic-framework]
Monica, I lost the last message regarding criteria for "splitting" an aggregated test assertion, but I know that you wanted to define what those criteria would be. I figure that using some examples from the MS Test Requirements is a good way to do that. The criteria for splitting the requirement are currently: 1) Rigor of splitting the requirement - if the requirement is broad in scope, for example requirement 0.1.1 "Supports all mandatory syntax defined in Core plus Additional Features" is a large requirement ( essentially validation of all generated messages by a candidate MSH )... and would best be served as a single assertion that could test any and all occurances ( through schema validation ). Another example would be r1.1.15 "All ebXML extension elements included within generated SOAP Envelope, Header and Body elements are namespace qualified to: "http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ebxml-msg/schema/msg-header-2_0.xsd". This would better be tested on a global scale through validation ". 2) The test harness does not allow reporting of individual results of an aggregated assertion. If our test harness will allow for reporting the possible results of aggregated Assertions, then some of our existing "atomic" test Assertions may be consolidated. For now, it hasn't been determined if our harness will support that, so requirements are defined using single test assertions. Hope this helps! Mike
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC