Re: Initial did:key interoperability test suite launched

We're not yet running DID Resolution test results on a regular basis, 
but here's an example of what they look like:
https://danubetech.github.io/did-resolution-test-suite/gh-pages/2022-05-17_00:31:21/mochareports/reports.html

Markus

On 29.08.22 15:08, Manu Sporny wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:38 AM Markus Sabadello <markus@danubetech.com> wrote:
>> Regarding "getting a jump-start on a DID Resolution test suite", there is already such a test suite:
>> https://github.com/danubetech/did-resolution-test-suite
> +1, apologies for the miscommunication on my part. What I was trying
> to say was that "implementers could get a jump-start on integrating
> with *a* nascent DID Resolution test suite". The ultimate DID
> Resolution test suite will be the one that Markus points to above.
> Implementers can get the simplest "Read" test working by integrating
> with the did:key Method test suite, and then integrating with the more
> complete DID Resolution test suite above when they want to be fully
> compliant with the DID Resolution specification.
>
>> I think we should contribute this to CCG too.
> +1
>
> Is there a place where the test results are run on a regular basis
> with a output report (we'll need that for the implementation report at
> W3C, if that's where we want to send the DID Resolution
> specification).
>
>> Sometimes the boundary between a DID method test suite (such as did:key) and a DID Resolution test suite is debatable, e.g. I raised an issue which lists a few tests that in my opinion should be moved from the did:key test suite to the DID Resolution test suite, since they test something that's not method-specific:
>> https://github.com/w3c-ccg/did-key-test-suite/issues/22
> Yes, agreed that those are generalized tests, and as you said it's
> debatable where they should go. The options include:
>
> 1. In the DID Resolution test suite.
>
> 2. In each DID Method test suite (as a basic sanity check since the
> requirements come for DID Core).
>
> 3. In both places.
>
> We put it in the did:key Method test suite because we wanted to make
> sure that the DID Document followed the normative requirements in DID
> Core as well as those layered in the did:key Method specification.
>
> I've put the text above in the issue tracker, in the issue you raised.
> Thanks for the clarifications, Markus... it's good to see progress
> across all of these areas. :)
>
> -- manu
>

Received on Monday, 29 August 2022 16:04:00 UTC