Title: review of 0.92 conf test suite
Jacques,
Thanks for your suggestions on
modifying the ebXML MS Conformance Test Suite.
I have also taken a shot
at rewording the section pertaining to the abstract test suite, along
with providing definitions of
Abstract Test Case and Executable Test Case.
I borrowed much of your wording and incorporated it into
the document.
Rather than try to merge my sections
with yours ( which will make for a very unreadable document ) I
am attaching only that small section where the
changes were made, for comparison and discussion at today's
meeting.
Thanks,
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From:
Jacques
Durand
To: ebXML IIC - main list
(E-mail)
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 2:04
AM
Subject: [ebxml-iic] review of 0.92 conf
test suite
See attached my review and comments on
latest version of
ebMS conf test
suite (0.92) (tagged <JD>)
summary of comments/proposed
updates:
1. Test Requirement table: Comments in line
in the "coverage" column.
reviewed
the "coverage" column, and propose either a rewording a bit more formal,
or in some cases to shift the
coverage statement to the abstract test suite.
Note: by default, coverage column value
should be something like: "[well] covered by the
corresponding abstract test case."
2. Added some explanation of Abstract vs.
Executable test cases (new section 3.3.2)
3. Added an explanation of the structure of
"abstract test suite" table, just before it.
4. Added a section :
"Test case execution limitations with TestFramework
1.0"
at the end of "abstract test
suite" table, explaining
what test
cases will not be translatable into executable test cases when
using Test Framework 1.0.
Regards,
Jacques
<<ebMS-ConfSuite-comments.zip>>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
of the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-iic/members/leave_workgroup.php.
abstract_test_suite_diffs.doc
