- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 17:13:33 -0000
- To: <gdaniels@sonicsoftware.com>, <public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org>
Glen > What I'm after here is a clear and simple way to look at a given message > exchange and know for sure which test was being executed. Agreed, for the debugging part and I think we have that in: "fault-test1234 foo bar snark snork" "test1234 - foo bar snark snork" etc > This is going to make writing validating endpoints easier (otherwise > you need to configure the endpoint before the messages are received - by 'validating endpoints' I take it you mean 'an observer': http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/observer/ > so I'm not exactly sure how you can say the tests should work without > being keyed on the test number?), it's going to make debugging easier > (not that we'll need any of that of course :)), and it's going to make > reading the log files easier, not to mention writing up the results. We discussed this a couple of times on the TF calls. We have a standard log file format which tags each message with the test case identifier: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/logs/ We decided to side-step how that taggging is actually done, but it could be added by hand or prior agreement on the order of messages. However I agree that recognising the test case based upon the content of the messages is simpler, at least during our bootstrap / debugging phase, hence the recommended optional mode: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/testsuite/#operations > Honestly I don't care if we use a fixed string format or use a SOAP > header, but I feel pretty strongly that it's a mistake to skip this kind > of thing. OK, and I think we have that, but we hope you're not reliant upon the test case identifier being present in the message for the 'final run'. Paul
Received on Monday, 9 January 2006 17:13:40 UTC