Re: [sca-policy] A New SCA Testing TC?

[Bob Freund <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>]

Ashok,
I am somewhat sympathetic to the argument that it ought to be possible  
for a new language to be brought in to the family, but I am concerned  
about creating a centralized testing TC.
One main reason is that it is unclear how long such a TC would be  
staffed or its members remain interested.  A new language could come  
along years from now.
IMO it would be better to describe the language interface tests in a  
language independent manner so that they could be implemented in  
whatever language as may arise in the future.
The problem is the determination of the correct implementation of  
those "meta" tests.  Perhaps there is some technical solution, but it  
escapes my limited imagination.
an alternate approach might be that the implementors might self- 
certify and be required to publish the tests used as well as the  
results before being able to claim conformance.  The customer's might  
them be able to judge for themselves the degree of rigor used and thus  
the quality of the self-certification.
-bob

On Jul 15, 2009, at 4:42 PM, ashok malhotra wrote:

> If you have been following the Assembly Testing work, you know that  
> the Assembly Test Cases are written in Java.
> Mike is now preparing a BPEL version.
>
> Clearly, the Java test cases test the Java C&I to some extent and  
> Bryan has raised an issue that asks whether the Assembly and Java  
> tests should be more cleanly separated, but there are  
> complications.  The Assembly tests need some C&I to test and some  
> duplication cannot be prevented.  Also, if the Assembly tests and  
> the language tests were separated, then who adjudicate differences  
> of opinion and duplication?  Further, if the Assembly tests were  
> shorn of any language C&I, someone could come along, pass only the  
> Assembly, Policy and Bindings tests and claim SCA compliance.
>
> So, I'm suggesting we consider forming a new TC that would be  
> responsible for all SCA Testing.
> Before you go "Aaargh!  Not another TC!", please consider the  
> advantages:
>
> 1. Bryan's issue would be closed as there would be only a single TC  
> and it would write and manage all the tests, some
> of which would, of course, cover Assembly and one or more language  
> C&Is.   In fact, thinking about it, many of the tests
> would cover some Assembly features, some Policy, a binding and some  
> C&I.
>
> 2.. If all the tests were in a single TC there would be no need for  
> someone else to settle disputes.
>
> 3. If an outside party were to come and claim SCA compliance, the  
> Testing TC would have the authority to vet their
> tests and say 'yay' or 'nay'.  Or to enforce which tests they should  
> run.
>
> What do people think?
> -- 
> All the best, Ashok
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php

smime.p7s