Re: [tag] TA Model

["Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

On 21/09/2007, stephen.green@systml.co.uk <stephen.green@systml.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't like restricting the flow part of the model to just
> conditions, trigger and result. I question whether there is
> always a trigger as such (although in some test technologies
> there might always be one, but we are to be independent of
> that I think). I question whether there is always *only* a
> trigger and result.


Again it's a question of boundaries. IMHO there must be some
action that initiates a test. Whether that is entry into the test code (time )
or an external event, there must be a trigger or the test won't run.

Without  a test result the test is a waste of time. It may be an interim
result eventually discarded, but there needs to be a result.


>
> In the UBL work there is absolutely nothing in the spec to
> specify a trigger or a result, at least not normatively.


> An invoice has the following element as its document root
> 'Invoice'.
>
> Or even
>
> An invoice MUST have the following element as its document root
> 'Invoice'.

In which case the passage of time / entry into the test code is
the test initiator.

The result is clear from the requirement.



>
> Secondly, during the running of a test there may be a need to
> watch for certain things

Which is hence part of the test and a test dependency, though
not a pre-condition. A test input?


which are not exactly the result as
> such. So the extra 'test' element could assert the need to watch
> for these things and perhaps terminate the test if they occur
> or assert that they have an impact of some sort on the result
> or the verdict irrespsctive of the result.

If, without this input, the test cannot pass, then the result is
clearly dependent on this input.


> Perhaps an attribute in each element

I've not seen any evidence that XML is helpful here.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk