Re: Minutes - WS-Addressing Test Suite TF call 5 Jan 2006

Having agreed on the call last night that the testname should be moved 
into the echo string itself rather than be an attribute (because having it 
as an attribute changes the required schema) I realised why it is that 
way... so that messages which attempt to generate a fault by sending the 
empty string still have the test string in them somewhere.

I've spoken to Paul and agreed that we'll modify the operation semantics 
for notify and echo so that either an empty text string or a text string 
beginning with the string 'fault' should cause a fault. This shouldn't 
break any existing implementations of the test suite and should be minimal 
work to add recognition of 'fault'. We will then be free to trigger faults 
using strings like fault-test1133

David

David Illsley
Web Services Development
IBM Hursley Park, SO21 2JN
+44 (0)1962 815049 (Int. 245049)
david.illsley@uk.ibm.com



<paul.downey@bt.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org
05/01/2006 21:55

To
<public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>
cc

Subject
Minutes - WS-Addressing Test Suite TF call 5 Jan 2006







Present: 
  David Illsley (IBM)
  Mike Vernal (Microsoft)
  Mark Nottingham (WG Chair) 
  Giovanni Boschi 
  Kim Palko 
  Glen Daniels (Sonic and Apache) 
  Paul Downey (BT)


agenda+ Action items

ACTION: pauld to flag which tests are for CORE, SOAP, WSDL CR 
(PENDING)

(not discussed!)

-----

Glen concerned about lack of non-anonymous test cases and 
combinations thereof:

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/issues/#test15

Glen: to supply non-anon ReplyTo/FaultTo test cases based upon existing 
operations.

These shouldn't impact those implementing the current operations
as services. 

Implementations are not required to generate each and every test 
case message - though expected to process and respond correctly 
to messages sent to them. We can use a canned client to send 
specific requests.

ACTION: Paul to make his canned implementation available

-----

agenda+ Dispatching by Action

GED (v) Action, specific testing required in this round of CR?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2006Jan/0007.html


Consensus on the call: we're happy with the Status Quo of the 
tests for Vancouver - i.e. echoIn and echoOut message bodies
enabling processing keyed by Action and/or GED.
 
WSDL CR testing may include tests to prove dispatching on the
action, should that be deemed appropriate.

-----

agenda+ Features not covered by tests

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/features/

* wsa:RelatesTo/@RelationshipType defaulting

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/features/#core07

David suggests an echo followed by a notify as one 
way of proving a relationship.

requiring defaulting  of RelationshipType is tricky
- as with the notify tests, implementations may not be able to
generate all of the messages. 

ACTION: Paul to write a RelatesTo test 

Again a 'canned' server may be used to send 
defaulted and undefaulted replies to test clients.

* optional faults 

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/features/#soap07

Lack of test cases - Glen raises it would be interesting to
know who had implemented what error codes - Paul remains concerned
how many are testable or implicitly imply order of processing. 

ACTION: Paul to enumerate missing fault code tests
ACTION: Paul to elicit which fault codes have been implemented

-----

agenda+ Other Issues

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/issues/

....

-----

agenda+ The interoperability Event

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Dec/0034.html
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite#status

Unclear if running implementations on laptops will be available
outside the hotel / room. Ideally endpoints should be publicly 
available.


-----

agenda+ Status of implementations

IBM, Microsoft, Axis2 confirmed on the call, 
Axis C/C++, Sonic, Sun and JBOSS possibly 
ready for Vancouver.

Paul asks that implementations should be able to optionally
send the test case number as content (not as additional elements or
attributes which would require the WSDL changing the Schema element 
from an xs:string into ComplexType.) as described:
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/#operations

-----
Previous meetings:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0033.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0016.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0003.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Nov/0001.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Oct/0004.html