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

Test Case Form Try-out

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:22:34 +0100
Message-ID: <2B7789AAED12954AAD214AEAC13ACCEF2709E16A@i2km02-ukbr.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
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?] 

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
)

[-psd i think this has now been replaced by  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/

{
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]

EOF





Received on Monday, 28 March 2005 20:23:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:04 GMT