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

Re: Misc Comments - Part 2

From: Arun Gupta <Arun.Gupta@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:33:35 +0530
To: paul.downey@bt.com
Cc: public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org
Message-id: <43AA9617.4000703@sun.com>

Paul,

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:
> 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).
I think Sun did it's share by providing the first set of testcases :)

> 
> 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'll be happy to do that provided I get editorial access. However, I'm 
on vacation for 3 weeks starting monday and thus will have limited 
access to email.

> 
> 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.
I dont think the changes suggested are editorial knits. For example, in 
the 7 questions asked below, only 2 are editorial. Maybe most of my 
questions could be answered over the concall but I'm not able to attend 
the conference call because of the odd timings in my timezone.

AIU, these tests are created to test for interoperability. Without 
understanding/documenting what interoperability feature is being tested, 
I think we are probably not producing a complete document.

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

I agree but I dont think we should not fix the tests because of this 
reason though. I've also implemented these testcases and willing to 
change them to make sure we do the right thing.

-Arun


> 
> 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 11:59:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:29:01 UTC