RE: [tag] Some discussion additions to Wiki

["Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

Stephen:

Added my comments inline in the wiki.
-Jacques 

-----Original Message-----
From: stephen.green@systml.co.uk [mailto:stephen.green@systml.co.uk] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 12:13 PM
To: TAG TC
Subject: [tag] Some discussion additions to Wiki

I just added the following to the "What a TA should and should not be"
not sure if that is the best place for it though (they also relate to a
comment we received from Dave Martson on the comment list regarding
automation of producing tests from TAs
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tag-comment/200708/msg00001.html)

"# Is there a need to distinguish the following in the TA model?:

     * Prose TA copied exactly from a specification
     * Prose TA not copied exactly from a specification
     * A predicate - a more formal expression than free-text prose and
which evaluates to true or false
     * A structure to allow separation of prose and/or predicate
expressions which describe preconditions for tests, post conditions for
tests, triggers and outcomes (stephen)

# If there are parts of the model which allow, mandate or recommend
predicate expressions would we expect, cater for and recommend the use
of a constraint language for these predicates

     * if they are expressed as XML would such XML be either
           o referred to as links, XQueries or IDs in the TA document
           o included in the TA document
     * what would be suitable for such expressions?
           o UML's Object Constraint Language (OCL) or OCL XMI (XML
representation of OCL)?
           o Web Ontology Language (OWL)?
           o Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL)?
           o Rule Markup Language(s)?
     * are XML-based expressions to be preferred to non-XML (such as
Backus-Naur based expressions)? (stephen)

# Suggestion:

     * we have somewhat divergent requirements for simple, mainly prose
TAs versus more complex, structured and perhaps fully automatable TAs
     * does this lead perhaps to two possible profiles - a profile aimed
at human-readable documentation of TAs and another profile aimed at
being either formally processed according to a particular notation or
methodology or even a set of TAs which are so defined (as predicates or
sets of predicates using say OCL XMI) as to be processable into tests
automatically with software tools (stephen)

# If the predicates of the structured part of the TA model can be
expressed with a language such as OCL then that language (as OCL does)
may have its own represenations of what it calls preconditions and
postconditions

     * does this mean there might be duplication or confusion with what
we have modeled using the same terms?
     * are these actually the same things or do we distinguish ours as
being in a different layer with different purposes or meanings (
           o are ours preconditions and postconditions constraining
something which OCL's say aren't (such as constraints more or whether
the test should occur rather than on what the test itself) or is there
such a fine distinction as to just be a grey area which might at worst
confuse or at least add the possibility of redundancy? (stephen)"


--
Stephen Green

Partner
SystML, http://www.systml.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 117 9541606

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+22:37 .. and voice