ebxml-iic-msg message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebxml-iic-msg] RE: other Schema docs - usage?
- From: Jacques Durand <JDurand@fs.fujitsu.com>
- To: "'ebxml-iic-msg@lists.oasis-open.org'" <ebxml-iic-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:10:46 -0800
Title: Welcome
Michael, Matt:
I
believe the "Test requirements" document and schema are on good
tracks.
Let me
try to summarize where we are, and raise some remaining
issues:
1- The
Requirements schema/doc, so far captures Level 1 ("core", or most of it).
When
the corresponding tests are run (controlled by ANT + JXUnit), one can
check that
an
ebXML message is well-formed and also semantically sound,
according to Level 1.
That
actually captures "wire-conformance" Level 1.
2- We
expect to drive the candidate MSH so that it generates a diverse-enough sampling
of messages,
each
of which will undergo the Level 1 "wire-conformance" tests
above.
3-
Issue: as we will drive the candidate MSH to generate messages to be tested, it
is not enough
to
test each of these through the "Level 1 tests" above. Indeed, we want to make
sure in addition that
the
set of generated messages (test set), uses all features expected in Level
1.
Example: if for some reason the candidate MSH fails to
generate some optional message elements - e.g.
digital signature, etc. - then its message format may
still be correct, as tested on the wire, but
we
cannot claim Level 1 passes, as the test coverage would not have checked all
expected message features.
Solutions: we need to have a way to "require" and to
check, in the generated message test set,
that
all expected message features have ben produced at least once. That could be
done by (a) either
keeping a checklist of all message features that are
concerned by Level 1, and match it with what has
actually been teted, (b) or by making sure that the
test associated with each Level 1 Requirement has been
used
at least once (<condition> part successful?), (c) or by doing a more
through comparison between
what
the test driver has been fed (input test cases) and what is observed on the
wire. note
that
would have some "service-conformance" aspect.
Just
following up on Michael schemas (ebXMLCompare.xsd, ebXMLSet.xsd,
ebXMLTestSuite.xsd):
4-
Michael: could you give a quick overview / use case of how you see instances of
these schemas being used?
(I
assume that instances of ebXMLTestSuite.xsd will be input to a "comparison
engine"?)
5- I
assume these schemas will then be used to compare actual output / expected
output, right?
(that
could then help on issue #3-c above.)
6-
Issue: We'll need to define how to compare schema instances, e.g. in some cases,
some distance is allowed
with
the reference document (e.g. optional element, order, different
values...)
7-
COnformance reports - should it be instance of an extended Requirements schema
with test results?
-Regards,
jacques
Hi:
Welcome to the ebxml-iic-msg sublist.
This is where you will read or post mails about MS
conformance testing design,
and more
generally about the "Conformance Testing Task Force" activities and
material.
Regards,
Jacques Durand
ebXML IIC chair
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC