On the interoperability side, I would take a look at the work done so
far on WS-I Testing Tools.
In cases where the WS-I BP 1.0 scope applies, I would even use the WS-I
Testing Tools directly. They are unlikely to test all the
interoperability aspects we are interested in, and we might want to say
that some BPEL applications are interoperable even when they do not
satisfy WS-I requirements, but it would give help us a lot since these
tools already exist, and it would provide a recognized stamp of approval
in those cases which do comply with the WS-I scope.
Ugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Ten-Hove [mailto:]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 10:38 AM
> To: bpel implementation
> Subject: [wsbpel-implement] Portability and Interoperability Testing
>
>
> BPEL implementors:
>
> I've been giving some thought lately to the issues of testing or
> demonstrating compliance to the WS-BPEL specification. As we have
> discussed in the past this really falls into two categories:
> portability
> and interoperability.
>
> Historically there have been several approaches to testing such
> compliance. Our situation is complicated by dependencies on
> implementation-specific messaging infrastructure, so we have
> some other
> issues to deal with before we get to the main event. What
> approaches do
> you, the implementors of BPEL, see as the most likely to demonstrate
> BPEL compliance, portability, and (reasonable)
> interoperability? Should
> we start trying to spin up an effort (perhaps external) to do this?
>
> I believe that doing nothing in this domain will do a lot
> of harm to
> BPEL. Are we at the right stage in BPEL's life to worry about
> this? Or
> has someone started addressing this issue already?
>
> Cheers,
> -Ron
>
>
