RE: [ebxml-iic-interop] Version 0.94 of ebXML MS 2.0 Conformance Test Suite

Mike:

 

That 
looks quite good. I think the content is fine.

 

I have 
the following editorial comments:

 

1. MSH 
acronym is used several times before being explained (in 1.8.2), we need to 
explain it the first time.

 

2. Sec 
3.2.1: definition of "test coverage": should refer to "..no matching 
abstract test case" instead of talking of 
"executable test case".

 

3. Sec 
3.3.2: needs better formatting (line breaks, color...)

 

4. Sec 
3.3.3: explanation of the table structure not precise enough: "Abstract Message Content: a logical expression based on XPath 
notation that characterizes the content of the 
message either to be sent, or to be received." Also: 
more importantly: we need to explain what the $parameter notation is 
!!!

 

5. 
Section 3.4 "Executable Test Suite" should more explicitly announce the 
dependency on Test Framework 1.0 in the title:

something 
like: "Executable Test Suite using ebXML Test Framework 
1.0" Also, given that this is really non-normative 
material

as 
far as teh ebMS conf test suite is concerned, I believe this section would be 
more appropriate after all the 

abstract 
test material is described (i.e. after 3.5), instead of cutting in two the test 
suite. Could even be put in an Appendix. What do you 
think?

 

 

Cheers,

 

Jacques

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kass 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 9:20 
  AM
To: Jacques Durand
Cc: ebXML IIC - interop list 
  (E-mail)
Subject: Fw: [ebxml-iic-interop] Version 0.94 of ebXML MS 
  2.0 Conformance Test Suite

  
 

  
----- Original Message ----- 
  
From: Michael 
  Kass 

  
To: Jacques Durand ; ebXML IIC - interop list 
  (E-mail) 

  
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 8:15 PM

  
Subject: [ebxml-iic-interop] Version 0.94 of ebXML MS 2.0 
  Conformance Test Suite

  

  
Jacque and all,

  
 

  
  Here's the latest conformance 
  specification, with updates based upon input during conference 
  calls,

  
plus Jacques suggestions.

  
 

  
  The changes include:

  
 

  
Jacques wording describing differences between 
  Abstract vs. Executable test cases - section 3.3 

  
 

  
Alignment  of  Test Requirements 
  "Abstract Test Case Coverage" column (section 3.2.2) with

  
abstract test cases, and creation of abstract 
  test cases where needed

  
 

  
Table showing alignment of Abstract with 
  Executable Test Cases

  
 

  
Regards,

  
Mike

  
 

  

  

  

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-interop/members/leave_workgroup.php.