JMS Binding testcases document updated

[Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>]

Following on from my comments below I decided
to update the JMS test assertions corresponding to untested cases by adding
a comment that explains why the assertions are untested/untestable, along
the lines explained below.  

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/42304/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-testcases-csd01-rev4.odt
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/42305/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-testcases-csd01-rev4.pdf

For BJM60010 there is no testcase because
it applies to the correlationScheme, which can take one of three SCA-defined
values, or an SCA implementation-specific value.  The SCA defined
values are already tested by 3 other test assertions, and implementation-specific
values cannot be tested.

This still leaves the open question
as to whether we need a new test for BJM60009.

Regards, Simon

__________________

Folks,

I've uploaded a new revision of the
JMS binding testcases which includes all resolved issues:

http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/42295/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-testcases-csd01-rev3.pdf
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/42294/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-testcases-csd01-rev3.odt

Issues applied:

BINDINGS-154 (also applies to latest
JMS spec revision)
BINDINGS-155
BINDINGS-156 (also applies to latest
JMS spec revision)
BINDINGS-157 (also applies to latest
JMS spec revision)
BINDINGS-158 (also applies to latest
JMS spec revision)
BINDINGS-159 (also applies to latest
JMS spec revision)

A couple of comments on this revision:

The file name has been changed to remove -1.0, but latest link includes
it, so not sure whether we will be able to get away with this change.  Its
certainly undesirable and confusing to have two version numbers in the
file name:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-bindings/sca-jmsbinding-1.1-testcases-1.0.html
 

All testcases are now mandatory.

There are a number of untested statements:

30013 - No way to simulate an internal
failure to create JMS resources
30019 - Can't check internal properties
of an activation spec
30022 - Can't check internal properties
of an activation spec
30037 - No way to simulate an internal
failure to create JMS resources
50002 - No way to inspect the bindingType
element
60006 - Runtime behaviour cannot be
checked
60009 - No testcase following recent
change from SHOULD to MUST - existing action item
60010 - Not sure why there's no testcase
for this one.
60018 - Tested by other tests.

I'll look into why 60010 has no testcase,
and already have an action item for 60009, so I think all the bases are
covered.

Regards, Simon

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU