Re: [tag] Re: Proposed shorter text for 3.7.2 Composition of Assertions

[Kevin Looney <Kevin.T.Looney@Sun.COM>]

Hi Stephen,

Here are some comments from your last edit (and merging some of the previous comments from Jacques/me).

Thanks,
Kevin L

---

([KL]Stephen, we should probably look back and edit the intro to 3.7.  If we remove the section on visibility, then we can probably remove the breakdown description of the following subsections. ) 

  3.7.2 Composition of Assertions

There are three dimensions that describe how assertions from a
referenced specification may be included within an umbrella
specification:

 'scope of inclusions',
 'conditionality of inclusions',
 'modification of inclusions',


These relationships between specifications can be expressed by
including a set of references in the test assertions document for
the umbrella spec. The references would be to any test assertions
from the referenced specification which are required according to
the conformance clause of the umbrella specification. An alternative,
if no such test assertions for the referenced specification exist, would
be to summarize conformance requirements to the referenced
specification in the form of a test assertion using its predicate:

([KL]Jacques revised the example - introducing normative statement, and identified requirement.) 

Case 1: The Widget specification says: "All requirements in this section only apply to "mini" widgets, i.e. widgets
that are conforming to the Mini-Widget Small Box specification 1.2."

"Requirement 701: If  a mini-widget has a battery holder, then the mini-widget MUST be labelled as 'low voltage'."


TA id: widget-TA701
Target:  Widget
Normative Source: Requirement 701 of the WidgetSpec 1.0
Predicate: [the widget] is labelled 'low voltage'.
Prescription Level: mandatory
Prerequisite: [the widget] is conformant to the Mini-Widget Small Box Specification 1.2 AND  [the widget] has a battery holder.

Scope of Inclusions

An umbrella specification usually relates to a referenced
specification by assuming or requiring conformance of its
implementation to this specification. [KL]These conformance relationships may be expressed in either the predicate or the prerequisite of a TA. Variations exist as follows.

([KL]reduced to two variations.) 

conformance to an (entire) umbrella specification, or specification profile
conformance to a specific normative statement from the umbrella specification

The predicate or the list of external test assertion references
would reflect such variations.

([KL]I think this statement is meant to replace the descriptions of how one might express conformance (in either predicate or prerequisite) to either (a) whole/part of a referenced spec, (b)single normative statements in a referenced spec.  The section is definitely 'more terse' without the enumeration of these variations.  Is it 'too far' without the examples? Perhaps TA701 shows a proper example (eg. Conformance expressed in the prereq to a (entire) referenced spec)?) 

Conditionality of Inclusions

It might be that the conformance or otherwise to a referenced
specification is a condition which is included in another test
assertion as a prerequisite. The prerequisite of the assertion may:
a. require that optional portions of the referenced specification
be implemented in the umbrella,
b. conditionally require optional portions of the referenced
specification be implemented in the umbrella (for example, based on
the presence of hardware or some other such support), or
c. make remaining (required) portions of the referenced
specification optional.

([KL]Jacques and I considered rewording this (perhaps orthogonally).  I think more emphasis should be placed on how 'referenced specs' have profiles with various statements of inclusion/optionality. The conditionality applies to 'overriding the optionality of the profile'. 

The key is that 'when an umbrella spec references these profiles, it may specify a change to this inclusion/optionality in a prerequisite in various ways (mandatory -> optional, optional -> mandatory, optional/mandatory (based on other conditions)).

([KL] I also wonder whether this section is too terse without an example.)

Modification of Inclusions

This dimension of inclusion describes where an umbrella specification
is conformant to a referenced specification, where some subset of
assertions must be modified. This means of inclusion assumes some
partitioning of the unchanged assertions and modified assertions. You
can use "lists of assertions" to describe in the prerequisite the
subset of assertions that the umbrella specification is conformant to
"unchanged". The remaining test assertions (the changed set) can be
individually specified as test assertions of the umbrella
specification.
Typically, assertions are modified in a referenced specification that
can be strengthened in a few ways:

strengthening the prescription level of an assertion (eg. x MAY do y
=> x MUST do y), or
strengthening the meaning of an assertion with additional
requirements (eg. IF x THEN z => IF (x AND y) THEN z).

([KL] This section remains at a sufficient level of description.)


([KL] Jacques has claimed this new dimension, we haven't really discussed it much. 

Jacques description:)

For example, Spec B is a 
specialized form of Spec A. Here, spec A is most general spec, and spec B is 
adding to it (e.g. like a WS-* spec is adding to or building on top of SOAP 
spec). So here, B is often requiring full conformance 
to A. 
and it looks like Stephen introduced this in 3.7 intro:

Specification modularity may also come from a “prototypical specification” - a "base specification" - from which specialized derivative specifications may define specific information for a given context. 


([KL] Upon further thought, I'm wondering if this is a dimension, if it is a sub-case of "Modification", or maybe just something different.  

Consider this as a sub-case of Modification:  With the addition of more assertions to a specification, we are typically 'strengthening' the specification (in a similar way to modifying individual assertions to strengthen requirements).

  Jacques, if you agree with this view, perhaps we can simply mention in the modification section that 'a referenced specification may be modified through the addition of further requirements'.)

---

Stephen Green wrote:

92040e120901080442t7bbbe3f9gbc10093906bcc0c@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">

"  3.7.2 Composition of Assertions

There are three dimensions that describe how assertions from a
referenced specification may be included within an umbrella
specification:

 'scope of inclusions',
 'conditionality of inclusions',
 'modification of inclusions'.

These relationships between specifications can be expressed by
including a set of references in the test assertions document for
the umbrella spec. The references would be to any test assertions
from the referenced specification which are required according to
the conformance clause of the umbrella specification. An alternative,
if no such test assertions for the referenced specification exist, would
be to summarize conformance requirements to the referenced
specification in the form of a test assertion using its predicate:

TA id: widget-TA108-1
Normative Source: [interpretation of conformance clause to WidgetSpec
1.0] "All widgets conformant to the WidgetSpec 1.0 specification must
also be conformant to the 'smaller box' assertions of the WidgetMobile
Small Box Specification 1.2"
Target: widget
Predicate: [widget] Conforms to WidgetMobile Small Box Specification 1.2
Prescription Level: mandatory


    Scope of Inclusions

An umbrella specification usually relates to a referenced
specification by assuming or requiring conformance of its
implementation to this specification. Variations exist as
follows.

 conformance to an (entire) umbrella specification
 conformance to a profile of the umbrella specification
 conformance to a specific normative statement from the umbrella specification

The prediacte or the list of external test assertion references
would reflect such variations."


   Conditionality of Inclusions

It might be that the conformance or otherwise to a referenced
specification is a condition which is included in another test
assertion as a prerequisite. The prerequisite of the assertion may:
   a. require that optional portions of the referenced specification
be implemented in the umbrella,
   b. conditionally require optional portions of the referenced
specification be implemented in the umbrella (for example, based on
the presence of hardware or some other such support), or
   c. make remaining (required) portions of the referenced
specification optional.


   Modification of Inclusions

This dimension of inclusion describes where an umbrella specification
is conformant to a referenced specification, where some subset of
assertions must be modified. This means of inclusion assumes some
partitioning of the unchanged assertions and modified assertions. You
can use "lists of assertions" to describe in the prerequisite the
subset of assertions that the umbrella specification is conformant to
"unchanged".  The remaining test assertions (the changed set) can be
individually specified as test assertions of the umbrella
specification.
Typically, assertions are modified in a referenced specification that
can  be strengthened in a few ways:

 strengthening the prescription level of an assertion (eg. x MAY do y
=> x MUST do y), or
 strengthening the meaning of an assertion with additional
requirements (eg. IF x THEN z => IF (x AND y) THEN z)."