- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 21:53:20 -0800
- To: <public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <37D0366A39A9044286B2783EB4C3C4E80184F8D0@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Resend - didn't seem to make it into the archive... ________________________________ From: Jonathan Marsh Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 5:43 PM To: 'David Illsley'; public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org Subject: RE: A fix for the async case and the WS-I logs There are unfortunately a couple of test cases that rely on the message number - 1236 and 1237. It's not clear these tests can be run reliably against the variety of log formats we have. (So far these tests have been giving constant green results.) Yuk, what a mess. This boils down to the same concepts exposed in the debate between the correspondence of WSDL and SOAP MEPs. Some of our logs/stylesheets/testcases assume the SOAP MEP model - a non-anonymous r/r consists of two SOAP one-way MEPs and therefore 4 HTTP messages. Some of our materials assume the WSDL MEP model, which means 2 messages for r/r regardless. We need to decide which is the right approach, as many things need to be fixed either way. The simplest fix is as David suggests, to strip out extra messages and not be able to examine HTTP responses without SOAP envelopes. But it does seem like useful capability to be able to add assertions about HTTP responses without soap envelopes. But the fixes involved are pretty invasive. The fix to the WS-I logs can probably be done most easily directly in ws-i.xsl by inserting this fragment in place (two times) of the existing attribute generation: <xsl:attribute name="message"> <xsl:choose> <xsl:when test="@type='request' and @conversationID='1'">1</xsl:when> <xsl:when test="@type='response' and @conversationID='1'">2</xsl:when> <xsl:when test="@type='request' and @conversationID='2'">3</xsl:when> <xsl:when test="@type='response' and @conversationID='2'">4</xsl:when> </xsl:choose> </xsl:attribute> Microsoft log generation would have to be updated too, if not to insert the missing messages, at least to insert the right message ID (2s would have to become 3s on non-anonymous messages). Unfortunately the testcases document does not use the message numbers from the message exchange document. We should probably replace <message from="A" to="B" ...> with something like <message order="1" ...> Mkschema.xsl would need corresponding changes, to match assertions up with the correct message id number. Some of the assertions (1236,1237) would need to be fixed - they rely on fixed message numbers. We could add additional assertions such as David suggests. This is complex enough that I didn't want to proceed without everyone's buyoff. Alternatively we could strip messages and number the messages just in ws-i.xsl, and maybe even live with or make small fixes to the testcases document and mkschema.xsl. But that loses the ability to examine (or at least count) the HTTP responses. P.S. I would be very surprised if running multiple tests in a single log works reliably in any case. At this point I'd be reluctant to invest the diligence necessary to verify that this works... ________________________________ From: public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-addressing-tests-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Illsley Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 8:50 AM To: public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org Subject: A fix for the async case and the WS-I logs I like green... and here's how we (well just IBM at the moment) can get some more... The area of the WS-I logs that I think caused most problems were those tests which use non-anonymous reply/fault to addresses. In these cases the WS-I monitor consists of 2 request response logs for each of these tests. The problem is how to select the 2 relevant messages from the 4 to apply the assertions againt. I'm proposing a pretty simplistic solution, which has at least one general down side but which I'm happy to accept for logs submitted by IBM. The approach is twofold: 1. Remove all messageEntry elements from the WS-I log files (or more accurately don't copy them across) which have an empty messageContent element In order to confirm that messages haven't been removed that should have assertions applied againt them, I suggest adding the following assertion to the first message of the aync tests: 2. When there are multiple message elements in the WS-Addressing log file format with the same testcase id, renumber the message value of the second one to 2. This is where the downside comes in ... it doesn't allow runs of the same test in the same log. It also mandates that there is no re-ordering of the logs but right now that isn't a problem. There are more advanced things we could do to pick out the second message as a reply e.g. examining the contents for an echoOut or Fault element or even using the WSAddressin RelatesTo value but that was beyond my XPath expertise In order to confirm that this all works can I also suggest adding the following assertion to the request messages of the async tests: <assert test="../following-sibling::log:message[@testcase=current()/../@testcase and @message='2']"/> No doubt Jonathan and Paul can come up with a better way of doing it if they have time but to keep things going I've got a very basic working solution going (sorry if my XSLT/XPath is horrendously inefficient). It consists of 2 changes: 1, ws-i.xsl: Replace <xsl:for-each select="//wsi-log303:messageEntry"> with <xsl:for-each select="//wsi-log303:messageEntry[string-length(wsi-log303:messageConten t/text())>0]"> And similarly for the other namespace 2. Add yet another file to the pipeline for the WS-I logs: fix-asyc.xslt <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:log="http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addressing/logs/" xmlns:soapenv="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"> <xsl:output method="xml" version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" indent="yes"/> <xsl:template match="* | comment()"> <xsl:copy> <xsl:apply-templates select="@*"/> <xsl:apply-templates/> </xsl:copy> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="log:message"> <xsl:copy> <xsl:apply-templates select="@*"/> <xsl:call-template name="testcase-message-renumber"> <xsl:with-param name="testcase" select="@testcase"/> </xsl:call-template> <xsl:apply-templates/> </xsl:copy> </xsl:template> <xsl:template name="testcase-message-renumber"> <xsl:param name="testcase"/> <xsl:attribute name="message"> <xsl:choose> <xsl:when test="preceding-sibling::log:message[@testcase=$testcase]">2</xsl:when> <xsl:otherwise>1</xsl:otherwise></xsl:choose> </xsl:attribute> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="@*"> <xsl:copy-of select="."/> </xsl:template> </xsl:stylesheet> This should make the IBM-IBM column from the event logs all green... and should be usable by the other participants using the WS-I tool if they're happy to accept the limitation I mentioned above. Paul, if this seems reasonable can you add these changes to the workflow, at least for the IBM case? Now for some attention to the new tests! Cheers, David David Illsley Web Services Development IBM Hursley Park, SO21 2JN +44 (0)1962 815049 (Int. 245049) david.illsley@uk.ibm.com
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 08:28:12 UTC