W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > April 2005

Re: Test Case Form Try-out

From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 17:07:08 +0200
To: paul.downey@bt.com
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050406150708.GN6132@w3.org>
* paul.downey@bt.com <paul.downey@bt.com> [2005-03-28 21:22+0100]
> In fulfilment of my long outstanding action item, here my attempt to  
> use the test case submission form [1] and some feedback.
> 
> I wanted to use an important use-case we have within BT, whereby the  
> request is sent using HTTP and the response comes back over a different  
> transport, but it seems like this and other use-cases are still the  
> subject of discussion over in the async task force[2]. So instead i  
> elected to try out the third in the set of scenarios submitted by  
> Microsoft[3].
> 
> Paul
> 
> [1]  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-addressing/2005Jan/ 
> 0022.html
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-async-tf/
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Mar/ 
> 0209.html
> 
> {To submit a test case, send an email to the list }
> [-psd guess we need a dedicated list?] 

We do have one:

    public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/

> Subject: Test Case - Echo Request-Response over HTTP
> Body:
> 
> {
> - Test Class (pick one):
> -- Conformance
> -- Interoperability
> -- Composibility
> -- Limit test/error handling
> }
> 
> [-psd I'm actually unsure what to put here, forced to choose 1 i'll go  
> for 'Conformance'. however i'd prefer to be able to categorise a test  
> case with a series of 'tags'. 'Interoperability' seems somewhat  
> redundant to me. ]
> 
> Test Class: Conformance
> 
> {
> - IPR classification (according to the policy
> http://www.w3.org/2004/06/29-testcases, select one
> )

I found in the minutes the agreement of the WG to keep the test suite
outside the Recommendation track:

    http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/5/01/31-ws-addr-minutes.html#item19

Therefore…

> [-psd i think this has now been replaced by  
> http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-testcases,
> the Microsoft scenarios were published under the W3C Document license,  
> i think this allows me to choose]
> 
> IPR Classification: Test Case Grant I
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants-200409/

… this should be a link to the Test Case Grant II:

    http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants2-200409/

as we're in case 2 of:

    http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-testcases.html

> {
> Related WSA Specification: Core | SOAP Binding | WSDL Binding
> }
> 
> [-psd am i expected to put only one here?
>    Multiple tags would seem to apply in this case,]
> 
> Specifications: Core, SOAP 1.1 Binding, WSDL 1.1 Binding
> 
> Detailed Description:
> 
> This scenario tests a request response with an address in the ReplyTo.
>  
> Message Exchange:
> 
> 1.      Client sends a request message to the Server.
> 2.      Server sends an HTTP 202 to the Client.
> 3.      Server sends a response message to the Client.
> 4.      Client sends an HTTP 202 to the Server.
> 
> [-psd i like this simple exchange format,
>      should we make it more formal and a part of the form?]
> 
> Expected response string must be same as request input string
> 
> Input for the Test Case: request.xml
> 
> Expected Results: response.xml
> 
> See also service.wsdl (not attached this for the purposes of this  
> try-out)
> 
> [-psd i think we should require example SOAP messages and WSDL where  
> applicable to be attached and be well-formed XML]

Would it be useful to make this a WBS form? It could help following
the template. However, if one wanted to mass-submit test cases, direct
submission to the list would probably be best. Maybe we could have
both.

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/

Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2005 15:07:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:05 GMT