RE: ebXML Conformance Charter discussions

[Cris Cooley <ccooley@overdomain.com>]

Philippe & all,
As I mentioned to Philippe, the OASIS XLST/XPath Conformance committee,
which I'm a member of, is about 1.5 years into an effort to achieve
conformance between xslt processors and the W3C Specifications.  The xslt
committee is designing a test suite to be "generic", that is, to apply to
conformance work by any other committees in OASIS working on conformance.
My participation in this ebXML workgroup will have to be very limited until
later, but I wanted to alert you to this work so you can bootstrap on these
existing efforts as much as possible.  The link to the XSLT Conformance
Committee is on the OASIS website
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/xslt/.

Cris

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Crisman Cooley
Overdomain, LLC
ccooley@overdomain.com
+1.805.683.0938 tel
+1.805.570.5474 cel
www.overdomain.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krishna Sankar [mailto:ksankar@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 10:58 PM
> To: iwasa; Philippe DeSmedt; ebxml-iic@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: SHIMAMURA Masayoshi
> Subject: RE: ebXML Conformance Charter discussions
>
>
> Hi,
>
> 	Here are my thoughts :
>
> 	1.	How to check the result of conformance test? OASIS or other
> organization checks test log files generated by test program?
>
> 	<KS>
> 		The test program would flag conformance and
> non-conformance and possibly
> some diagnostic messages.
> 	</KS>
>
> 	2.	Who does issue the certification of the
> conformance?  OASIS or other
> organization?
> 	<KS>
> 		We discussed this in detail at the SAML
> conformance. OASIS will not be
> able to do any certification - too much legal and other issues. Either
> industry organizations or a govt agency like NIST could be the certifying
> agency.
> 	</KS>
>
> 	3.	Does the activity mean development of “Reference
> Implementation” of ebXML Message Service?
> 	<KS>
> 	Most probably Yes. This would be one of the ways to test an
> implementation. Compare results with the ref impl.
> 	</KS>
> 	4.	If the activity means creating of implementation
> guideline for each
> vendor, the guidelines should specify which API should be used as
> MSH’s interface, Current Message Service specification does not
> define MSH’s API. This situation causes portability problem of
> ebXML Application. It is difficult to develop standard conformance check
> program without MSH’s standard API. The guidelines should specify
> what functions must be supported at least to conform with the
> ebXML Message
> Service specification Current Message Service specification defines many
> functions  (e.g. Security, Synchronous/Asynchronous, FTP ...) But the
> specification does not define what function must be supported to conform
> with the specification. So, it is difficult to decide what function should
> be implemented. This cause interoperability problems between different
> vendor implementations
> 	<KS>
> 	ebXML specs might not be complete in terms of conformance clause and
> conformance points. This is the job this TC to figure out these details in
> conjunction with the respective spec committee.
> 	</KS>
> 	5.	We need to define system model and test items for
> interoperability
> test. The result of the interoperability test should be used for
> evaluation
> of conformance.
> 	An example of the system model:
> 	<snip.../>
> 	<KS> Yep. This would be another big area to be elaborated.
> My feeling is
> that we would need to divide the subject into at least 6 or 7 sub
> committees
> which deal with each area.
> 	</KS>
>
> 	6.	What is the “conformance laboratories” work?
> 	<KS>
> 	If we succeeded in initiating a lab (most probably under the NIST
> umbrella) it would of course run the conformance tests developed
> by this TC.
> AT a min. the lab could be a place where conformance,
> interoperability et al
> can be checked.
> 	Whether it will do actual "certification" is a good question.
> 	BTW, if we develop the conformance software right, the
> report it generates
> should be self-evident as to the various conformance issues.
> 	</KS>
> 	7.Other Issues : Cooperation with OASIS ebXML Message
> Service TC et al
> 	<KS>
> 	Yep, we are the conformance arm possibly for ebXML. May be
> just the TRP.
> But we would work with all the respective TCs.One of the main
> influence from
> our side would be to develop the conformance clause for the specifications
> so that the conformance can be tested.
> 	</KS>
>
> 	Here are some of the relevant links we had collected for the SAML
> conformance.
>
> 	1.	Sample Conformance Clause and conformance program
> document outlines.
> Attached as two zip files
> 	2.	Sample Conformance Clause : attached. We need to
> have similar clauses
> in our documents.
> 	3.	The documents also contain URLs to relevant NIST documents
>
> cheers
>   |-----Original Message-----
>   |From: iwasa [mailto:iwasa@fs.fujitsu.com]
>   |Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 4:05 PM
>   |To: Philippe DeSmedt; ebxml-iic@lists.oasis-open.org
>   |Cc: SHIMAMURA Masayoshi
>   |Subject: Re: ebXML Conformance Charter discussions
>   |
>   |
>   |Sorry, here is the presentation.
>   |
>   |Iwasa
>   |
>   |
>   |
>   |> Philippe,
>   |>
>   |> I think the proposed charter is appropriate.
>   |> However I would like to have some clarification
>   |> for some items. Here is our question and
>   |> discussion items I would like to raise at the
>   |> F2F meeting next week. Is it possible to have
>   |> time to explain this presentation at the F2F?
>   |> Thanks,
>   |>
>   |> Iwasa
>   |> Fujitsu
>   |>
>   |
>