Re: Minutes - WS-Addressing Test Suite TF call 8 Dec 2005

See inline ...

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:
> Present: David Illsley (IBM), Mike Vernal (Microsoft), Paul Downey (BT)
> 
> agenda+ Action items
> 
> ACTION: pauld to define file format (DONE)
> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/logs/
> 
> a supplied XSLT can convert WS-I monitor logs 
> into our own succinct XML format.
With this, can I use WS-I monitor to log my SOAP messages and then use 
the supplied stylesheet to transform the monitor log into the required 
format ?

> 
> ACTION: pauld to supply his message checking tool (DONE)
> http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/observer/
Further on, the processor.xsl here will be able to say whether a test 
passed or failed ?

> 
> The observer applies the test case XPath tests to messages 
> in a log file using XSLT to generate a Schematron schema.
This is just an implementation detail and as a test developer, I dont 
need to worry about it, right ?

I understand there could be multiple approaches but is the following one 
a correct approach ?

As a test developer, I focus on writing my tests (whether I start from 
WSDL or not is an implementation detail). WS-I monitor can be used to 
capture SOAP logs. ws-i.xsl will transform the captured monitor log into 
another XML document understood by observer.xsl. Finally, observer.xsl 
will parse this newly created XML log file and report which tests are 
passing and failing.

What are the other alternatives to generate pass/fail results ?

> 
> ACTION: pauld to cite WSDL and simple SOAP 1.2 request/response anon
> ReplyTo test case (DONE)
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0004.html
> 
> ACTION: pauld to ensure all Mike's tests are incorporated (DROPPED)
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Oct/0004.html
> 
> - see Tracking of issues, below
> 
> ACTION: pauld to flag which tests are for CORE, SOAP, WSDL CR (ONGOING)
> 
> Flags exist in the XML, just needs flagging in the HTML
> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ Tracking of issues
> 
> Now David now CVS access we need to coordinate our efforts and
> mop up some of the bugs and outstanding issues
> 
> ACTION: David to create a testsuite issues list
> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ Some inconsistencies in the tests? [Rick Rineholt]
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0010.html
> 
> ACTION: pauld to describe the notify and echo operation semantics 
> ACTION: David to fix the WSDL to describe the messages correctly
> 
> Discussion of including the test case number in the messages, Paul
> uncomfortable as it could promote cheating (from TDD advocates like
> himself :) However all see this 'mode' as being useful, esp when
> bootstrapping the interop event.
> 
> ACTION: pauld to encourage implementers to optionally be able to echo the testcase no.
> 
> -----
> agenda+ tests 1150 and 1250 [Craig Chaney]
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0007.html
> 
> ACTION: David to review the XPaths and documents in tests 1150 and 1250 (ReplyTo)
> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ 1131 and 1231 appear to be the same [Craig Chaney]
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/2005Dec/0002.html
> 
> ACTION: David to review 1131 and 1231 to guess what pauld was thinking
> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ The interoperability Event
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Dec/0034.html
> 
> Arun's coordination concern will be addressed by having at least one
> public endpoint for people to check their implementations prior to the event.
Not sure how this addresse my concern. I was more interested in finding 
out how will the implementers communicate with each other. In debugging 
a test case failure, I'm guessing we'll be talking specifics about our 
products and platforms and some of us may not like to share the 
information publicly. Sun's product is all open sourced so I've no 
inhibitions in talking publicly about it but that may not be the case 
for all participants.

In the WS-I Sample Apps WG, we created an alias only for the 
implementers since the overall WG alias had approx 200 members. Are we 
going to do something similar here as well ?

-Arun

> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ Call for implementations
> 
> No news
> 
> -----
> 
> agenda+ Missing features?
> 
> Concerns, again, over lack of test cases for optional faults.
> 
> ACTION: pauld and David to enumerate each optional fault as a sub-feature of SOAP07 
> 
> -----
> 
> Previous meetings:
> 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
> 

-- 
got Web Services ?
Download Java Web Services Developer Pack from
http://java.sun.com/webservices

Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 07:30:06 UTC