tag meeting minutes 2007-05-17

["Serm Kulvatunyou" <serm@nist.gov>]

Title: tag meeting minutes 2007-05-17

I will post this on the Wiki once I know the URL. For the time being, here it is the minute for 2007-05-17 call.

Thanks,

Serm

----------------------------------

Participants:

Jacques Durand

Serm Kulvatunyou

Hyunbo Cho

Kevin Looney

Mary McRae

Patrick Curran

Paul Rank

Victor Rudometov

Vladimir Rudometov

Stephen Green

Summary of action items:

-       Everybody posts example test assertions that they know of.

-       Everybody posts questions/challenges/concerns on the wiki for future discussions.

-       Everybody posts related works on the test assertion specification/guideline.

-       VR and PC will report more about Wiki.

-       Discuss meeting schedule on the email.

-       Discuss F2F meeting.

- Discuss about Web-based sharing tool.

PC: May have suggestion and sponsoring of another web-based sharing tool.

- Discuss about scheduling

JD: Another option to resolve the time difference is to have two meetings at different times such as 11am EST and midnight EST. The latter one would allow participants from Far East to participate. However, there might be an issue with the voting.

PC: Alternate the time every week. All important agenda items will be discussed on both meetings. Results of discussion from one meeting will be posted on the Wiki for additional comments.

HC: Prefer to have just one conference and the current time is okay for him.

- Wiki - as a collaboration platform to alleviate time differences.

PC: Not recommend to use Wiki for editing the specification. It is better to use it for a specific piece of work or for managing issues list.

PC: Propose that VR be the wiki master.

VR: Will take a look closer at the Wiki and report to the group next time.

- Face to Face meeting

PC: St. Petersburg is proposed.

JD: Let’s exchange more emails about this.

- Scope and readership of the specification

VS: MSFT XPS specification is an example - http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/xps/downloads.mspx. Entity under tests are for example classes, parameters in java, complexType, simpleType in XML.

JD: So you mean to start from looking at existing test assertions for existing specifications like java and try to abstract from there.

PC: And think about what else are not covered by those existing materials.

JD: Homework for everyone is to share existing TA that they know of.

PC: Suggest to post questions/challenges about TA on the Wiki/mailing list. This will help scope. Hope to have something more than just rewording statements from the specification. OTOH, also think that the TA spec should be simple enough to be used by specification developers.

VS: Is test coverage computation in the scope?

PC: It is out of scope, our work should provide a ground for test coverage analysis though.

Serm: Agree. Test coverage needs the mapping b/w TA and Test Case. Since we have no test case, we can’t do test coverage.

JD: TA= how to verify a spec requirement (assuming an abstract-enough test model)

VS: For simplicity I suggest to use COVERAGE=number of tested test assertions.