RE: Interop scenarios readiness

Gil has been working on a scenario doc so he could probably comment more, 
but I think its a bit of both.  A sample app that tests all the operations 
and variants in the specs.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.



Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com> 
12/03/2010 06:43 PM

To
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc
"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Subject
RE: Interop scenarios readiness






At what granularity would the one big scenario test the features in the 
various specifications? Would it be focused at the operation/message 
level? For example, a unit test for each operation defined by the 
protocol. Or would it be sort of a sample application that is expected to 
generally exercise the various operations defined by the various 
specifications?
 
Thanks.
 
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
[mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ram 
Jeyaraman
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 1:07 PM
To: Doug Davis
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: Interop scenarios readiness
 
Using one big scenario to do testing seems fine as long as it allows those 
who opt out of testing some of specifications to do so in a 
straight-forward manner such as making the specification features optional 
relative to the big scenario. Thanks.
 
From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 12:37 PM
To: Ram Jeyaraman
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: Re: Interop scenarios readiness
 

Ram, 
  one of the things we talked about during the last call (which you were 
unable to attend) was the idea of creating one big scenario rather than 
many smaller ones.  Clearly it would need to have support for each spec 
defined as optional so that people could only support the ones they 
wanted,but for those that support more than one having a consolidated 
scenario will not only make their lives easier but it might also expose 
some potential composition bugs that we might otherwise miss.  Asir asked 
for some time to think about this - any news from your side? 

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog. 

Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com> 
Sent by: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org 
12/03/2010 01:32 PM 


To
"public-ws-resource-access@w3.org" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org> 
cc

Subject
Interop scenarios readiness
 








I suggest that we discuss and determine when we expect all the 
interoperation scenarios will be ready so that test implementation work 
can proceed. When interoperation scenarios will mature and be ready for 
test implementations to use is a critical factor in determining when we 
can do the testing/F2F. In order for us to do testing in mid-February as 
agreed, based on my estimate, we should have the interoperation scenarios 
ready no later than Dec  21st. 
  
Does getting interoperation scenarios mature by Dec 21st seem a realistic 
possibility? 
  
Thanks.