coments on Section 3.7.2 "COmposition of Assertions" (V0.995)

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

NOTE: comments below should NOT be seen as in critical need to be addressed, before approving the first committee draft (CD) of the guideline.

 

In Section 3.7.2 "COmposition of Assertions" (V0.995)

 

A few remarks that call for some fixes:

 

 

1- the Title is misleading: this is not about composing [test] assertions, but more like "Assertions about Conformance Statement" or the like. Indeed what's really original in this section, is TAs that use (either in their prereq or predicate) full-fledged conformance statements to other specs. Given that conformance statements are usually described by COnfomance Clauses that themselve often (but not always) translate into a set of TAs, this section could be about "meta-TAs". (So "Assertions about Assertions" could also go as title)

 

 

2- Previous comments made on the examples in this section (and agreed prior to Sept 30 mini-F2F), were not fully implemented in this new version.

Namely, the "Interpretation" of  TA id: widget-TA108-1 is not correct:

 

Normative Source: Conformance clause to Mini-Widget Small Box Specification 1.2

Prerequisite: [the widget] is conformant to Mini-Widget Small Box Specification 1.2

Predicate: [the widget] is conformant to WidgetSpec 1.0

 

the way this TA reads, the normative Source must be aligned with the Predicate: it should be "Conformance clause to WidgetSpec 1.0" (exactly like in widget-TA109-1)

The presence of the prerequisite means that the TA only applies to widgets already known as confirming to Mini-Widget Small Box spec:

Its interpretation should then be: "A mini-widget (conforming to  Mini-Widget Small Box ...) MUST conform to WidgetSpec 1.0 as described in the COnformance Clause of this spec."

The current interpretation seems to imply that all mini-widgets MUST conform to  WidgetSpec 1.0 but thats not what the TA says.

 

 

 

3- similar remark for the last example:

TA id: widget-TA120-1

Normative Source: specification requirement 120 in WidgetSpec 1.0

Prerequisite: IF [the widget] has restriction of box size 760 mm x 480 mm x 100 mm or less THEN [the widget] is conformant to the Conformance Profile of the Mini-Widget Small Box Specification 1.2.

Predicate: [the widget] is conformant to WidgetSpec 1.0

 

The predicate should be aligned with Normative Source.

Interpretation is not correct: The presence of the prerequisite means that the TA only applies to widgets already known as confirming to Mini-Widget Small Box spec UNLESS they have NO box size restriction (760 mm x 480 mm ...) ("A implies B" is same as "NOT(A) OR B")

Its interpretation should then be: "A widget with NO box size restriction, OR that is a mini-widget conforming to  Mini-Widget Small Box ...,  MUST conform to WidgetSpec 1.0 as described in the COnformance Clause of this spec."

 

 

Jacques