W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org > January 2006

Minutes - WS-Addressing Test Suite TF call 5 Jan 2006

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:55:23 -0000
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC9522550276F1C0@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>

  David Illsley (IBM)
  Mike Vernal (Microsoft)
  Mark Nottingham (WG Chair) 
  Giovanni Boschi 
  Kim Palko 
  Glen Daniels (Sonic and Apache) 
  Paul Downey (BT)

agenda+ Action items

ACTION: pauld to flag which tests are for CORE, SOAP, WSDL CR 

(not discussed!)


Glen concerned about lack of non-anonymous test cases and 
combinations thereof:


Glen: to supply non-anon ReplyTo/FaultTo test cases based upon existing operations.

These shouldn't impact those implementing the current operations
as services. 

Implementations are not required to generate each and every test 
case message - though expected to process and respond correctly 
to messages sent to them. We can use a canned client to send 
specific requests.

ACTION: Paul to make his canned implementation available


agenda+ Dispatching by Action

GED (v) Action, specific testing required in this round of CR?

Consensus on the call: we're happy with the Status Quo of the 
tests for Vancouver - i.e. echoIn and echoOut message bodies
enabling processing keyed by Action and/or GED.
WSDL CR testing may include tests to prove dispatching on the
action, should that be deemed appropriate.


agenda+ Features not covered by tests


* wsa:RelatesTo/@RelationshipType defaulting


David suggests an echo followed by a notify as one 
way of proving a relationship.

requiring defaulting  of RelationshipType is tricky
- as with the notify tests, implementations may not be able to
generate all of the messages. 

ACTION: Paul to write a RelatesTo test 

Again a 'canned' server may be used to send 
defaulted and undefaulted replies to test clients.

* optional faults 


Lack of test cases - Glen raises it would be interesting to
know who had implemented what error codes - Paul remains concerned
how many are testable or implicitly imply order of processing.  

ACTION: Paul to enumerate missing fault code tests
ACTION: Paul to elicit which fault codes have been implemented


agenda+ Other Issues




agenda+ The interoperability Event


Unclear if running implementations on laptops will be available
outside the hotel / room. Ideally endpoints should be publicly 


agenda+ Status of implementations

IBM, Microsoft, Axis2 confirmed on the call, 
Axis C/C++, Sonic, Sun and JBOSS possibly 
ready for Vancouver.

Paul asks that implementations should be able to optionally
send the test case number as content (not as additional elements or
attributes which would require the WSDL changing the Schema element 
from an xs:string into ComplexType.) as described:

Previous meetings:
Received on Thursday, 5 January 2006 21:55:46 UTC

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