RE: Misc Comments - Part 2

Arun

sorry, I'm finding finding time to spend on the Test Suite
difficult atm and the small bursts of time I've found have been 
absorbed context switching and looking at these fairly open 
questions rather than forging ahead blanking out missing 
testcases (something we hoped others would assist with).

What would help me greatly is if you turn these into specific 
changes  to the testsuite, ideally in terms of edits to the 
testsuite.xml and example documents, as advised here:

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

I'm guessing most of your concerns could be resolved 
by adding XPaths and descriptions to the existing test cases, 
something I can undertake to look at over the break.

Also, others have already implemented the testsuite, so 
breaking changes have impact upon me, IBM, Microsoft and 
possibly others..

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org on behalf of Arun Gupta
Sent: Tue 12/20/2005 10:48 AM
To: WS-Addressing Tests
Subject: Misc Comments - Part 2
 

1). What additional interop does test1204 test for other than that 
tested by test1202 and test1203 ?

2). In test1205, if FaultTo address is "none" then no fault message 
should be sent back. Moreover the message from A to B is a one-way 
message, so even by that there should be no response sent back. I think 
SOAP12-HTTP-In-Only-Fault does not fit here unless I'm missing something 
  obvious.

Further, I'm trying to understand what WS-A feature interop is this 
testcase testing ?

4). There is no test for "Action Not Supported" fault. I thought at one 
time we agreed that is the most common fault scenario (cant find 
reference though). On a related point, I think test1240 should instead 
be checking for "Action Not Supported" fault since that is more likely 
to occur. A duplicate To or any other WS-A header in the SOAP message is 
less likely to occur.

5). test1133: Test description does not mention about ReplyTo containing 
reference parameters but even then there is an XPath check. I think the 
XPath check is correct as it will ensure that even though both ReplyTo 
and FaultTo has reference parameters, only FaultTo refps are returned. 
Further, the test description should be updated to reflect that.

5). What interop feature is 1206 testing ?

6). In test 1207, is the inconsistency between the number reference 
parameters and metadata intentional ? I think we should try to keep the 
test simple and just one of each (I dont care which one we choose).

7). I thought the purpose of test1208 is to test all possible 
extensiblity points. But no EPR extensiblity attributes are used ? For 
example in the related message [1],

<wsa:ReplyTo>

could be replaced with

<wsa:ReplyTo extraMetadata="true">.

Similarly, there are no extensiblity attributes on wsa:Address. For example,

<wsa:Address>

could be replaced with

<wsa:Address physical="true">

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/documents/notify/soap12/message9.xml

Thanks,
-Arun

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

Received on Thursday, 22 December 2005 11:03:05 UTC