- 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 [-psd i think this has now been replaced by 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