W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-soap-jms@w3.org > August 2008

RE : Initial XML-based testcase definitions

From: Phil Adams <phil_adams@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:30:33 -0500
To: "TALBOT Jacques (TJA)" <Jacques.TALBOT@teamlog.com>
Cc: "public-soap-jms@w3.org" <public-soap-jms@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF4F897CDE.4D5FB957-ON862574AB.004EEA07-862574AB.004FB3CF@us.ibm.com>
Please don't read too much into the set of tests that you see in my 
initial drop.    Our first goal is to determine the format for describing 
the tests, and at this point I have defined only 2 of the most basic tests 
(a one-way and a two-way) just to provide an example of how tests are 
defined.      Once we work out the details of how the testcases will be 
defined, then the whole group can start to define various tests using the 
agreed-upon format.

When defining the various testcases for the SOAP/JMS test suite, we should 
definitely take a good look at the existing testcases within the 
WS-Addressing to see what makes sense to incorporate into our test suite, 
but by and large, I would not expect to see any WS-Addressing-specific 
tests in our test suite.     I don't think it would be correct for us to 
mandate the use of WS-Addressing in order for a vendor to claim compliance 
with the SOAP/JMS spec.    It sounds like what you are after would be some 
sort of "profile", similar to the various WS-I profiles which attempt to 
pull together various specs into a definition of a useful set of function 
to solve a specific set of problems.       Perhaps some follow-on work to 
the SOAP/JMS spec would be a separate effort to do just this???

Phil Adams 
WebSphere Development - Web Services
IBM Austin, TX
email: phil_adams@us.ibm.com
office: (512) 838-6702  (tie-line 678-6702)
mobile: (512) 750-6599

"TALBOT Jacques (TJA)" <Jacques.TALBOT@teamlog.com>
Phil Adams/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "public-soap-jms@w3.org" 
08/20/2008 02:23 AM
RE : Initial XML-based testcase definitions

Phil et als,
I probably miss something on how the WG is working.
If you implement all these WSA use cases, you will gather a lot of "good 
practices" on the full stack: JAX-WS/WSA/SOAP/JMS
This should be communicated to the end users thru some channel, the primer 
or whatever.
As far as I am concerned, this would perfectly fit my WSA needs.
So why is the mailing list insisting that WSA is off-topic?
The fact that it is normative (in the spec) or not (in the primer) is of 
course very important to the WG and the vendors, not so important for end 
Jacques.Talbot@teamlog.com  Mobile: 06 07 83 42 00
De : public-soap-jms-request@w3.org [public-soap-jms-request@w3.org] de la 
part de Phil Adams [phil_adams@us.ibm.com]
Date d'envoi : mercredi 20 août 2008 06:23
À : public-soap-jms@w3.org
Objet : Initial XML-based testcase definitions

Hi everyone, 
Attached is a zip file containing what I have done so far with defining 
testcases in a format modelled after the WS-Addressing test suite.     The 
main file to focus on at this point would be testcases/testcases.xml 
inside the zip file.    This file contains the definition of the 
individual testcases.   In the same directory is testcases.xslt which is 
used to produce HTML from the XML file.   I haven't worked all the kinks 
out of that yet so I haven't tried to actually process the XML file with 
xslt yet.    But I wanted to get this out ASAP so folks could take a look 
at the testcase definitions at least.      My intent would be to 
eventually have a set of testcases documented similar to the WS-Addressing 
test suite, located here: 

Let me know if you have any comments on what I've done so far. 


Phil Adams 
WebSphere Development - Web Services
IBM Austin, TX
email: phil_adams@us.ibm.com
office: (512) 838-6702  (tie-line 678-6702)
mobile: (512) 750-6599
Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2008 14:31:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:17:19 UTC