- From: Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 17:07:08 +0200
- To: paul.downey@bt.com
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
- Message-ID: <20050406150708.GN6132@w3.org>
* paul.downey@bt.com <paul.downey@bt.com> [2005-03-28 21:22+0100]
> In fulfilment of my long outstanding action item, here my attempt to
> use the test case submission form [1] and some feedback.
>
> I wanted to use an important use-case we have within BT, whereby the
> request is sent using HTTP and the response comes back over a different
> transport, but it seems like this and other use-cases are still the
> subject of discussion over in the async task force[2]. So instead i
> elected to try out the third in the set of scenarios submitted by
> Microsoft[3].
>
> Paul
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-ws-addressing/2005Jan/
> 0022.html
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-async-tf/
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2005Mar/
> 0209.html
>
> {To submit a test case, send an email to the list }
> [-psd guess we need a dedicated list?]
We do have one:
public-ws-addressing-tests@w3.org
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing-tests/
> Subject: Test Case - Echo Request-Response over HTTP
> Body:
>
> {
> - Test Class (pick one):
> -- Conformance
> -- Interoperability
> -- Composibility
> -- Limit test/error handling
> }
>
> [-psd I'm actually unsure what to put here, forced to choose 1 i'll go
> for 'Conformance'. however i'd prefer to be able to categorise a test
> case with a series of 'tags'. 'Interoperability' seems somewhat
> redundant to me. ]
>
> Test Class: Conformance
>
> {
> - IPR classification (according to the policy
> http://www.w3.org/2004/06/29-testcases, select one
> )
I found in the minutes the agreement of the WG to keep the test suite
outside the Recommendation track:
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/5/01/31-ws-addr-minutes.html#item19
Therefore…
> [-psd i think this has now been replaced by
> http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-testcases,
> the Microsoft scenarios were published under the W3C Document license,
> i think this allows me to choose]
>
> IPR Classification: Test Case Grant I
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants-200409/
… this should be a link to the Test Case Grant II:
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/testgrants2-200409/
as we're in case 2 of:
http://www.w3.org/2004/10/27-testcases.html
> {
> Related WSA Specification: Core | SOAP Binding | WSDL Binding
> }
>
> [-psd am i expected to put only one here?
> Multiple tags would seem to apply in this case,]
>
> Specifications: Core, SOAP 1.1 Binding, WSDL 1.1 Binding
>
> Detailed Description:
>
> This scenario tests a request response with an address in the ReplyTo.
>
> Message Exchange:
>
> 1. Client sends a request message to the Server.
> 2. Server sends an HTTP 202 to the Client.
> 3. Server sends a response message to the Client.
> 4. Client sends an HTTP 202 to the Server.
>
> [-psd i like this simple exchange format,
> should we make it more formal and a part of the form?]
>
> Expected response string must be same as request input string
>
> Input for the Test Case: request.xml
>
> Expected Results: response.xml
>
> See also service.wsdl (not attached this for the purposes of this
> try-out)
>
> [-psd i think we should require example SOAP messages and WSDL where
> applicable to be attached and be well-formed XML]
Would it be useful to make this a WBS form? It could help following
the template. However, if one wanted to mass-submit test cases, direct
submission to the list would probably be best. Maybe we could have
both.
--
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2005 15:07:09 UTC