[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-tx] optional features means optional tests?
Per the resolution to i047: "A coordination service that supports an Activation service MUST support the Completion protocol." The Activation service has always been optional. This is, of course, a spec statement. From an AT interop perspective, the majority of the tests focussed on the madatory 2PC protocol but there are 2 scenarion that include the Activation and Completion protocols. For AT, I don't believe we categorized interop scenarios as "optional" or not. Regards, Ian Mark Little <mark.little@jbos s.com> To ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org 20/09/2006 17:51 cc Subject Re: [ws-tx] optional features means optional tests? I don't believe we came to any agreement on this as a TC. As we approach BA interop I'd at least like to know what is and is not required/mandated. Any chance we can discuss this on the next call? Mark. On 6 Sep 2006, at 13:42, Mark Little wrote: > > On 6 Sep 2006, at 11:51, Alastair Green wrote: > >> Completion protocol is not mandatory under any circumstances. >> Activation Service is not mandatory under any circumstances. > > > The change from mandatory to optional occurred during that interop. > phase. If it had been earlier, then I would be arguing for the same > point there. > >> >> In my view, to repeat, the point of these interop tests is to >> prove (very roughly) -- better, to give some confidence -- that >> the words in the spec are capable of being rendered into >> interoperable software. > > But that should not mean that the tests themselves are mandatory. > The distinction between optional and mandatory elements in a > specification and how they are handled by optional and mandatory > tests in used well in W3C. Are you suggesting that those > specifications/standards are not interoperable? > >> >> Besides, how hard is it to do this? Support for mixed outcome at a >> wire level is trivial. > > Fine, but it shouldn't make the interop. tests mandatory. All that > does is make it easier for those companies who wish to participate > in those tests to do so. > > What I want is for us to agree that optional features are covered > by optional tests. Then we can have a discussion about how many > companies we should ideally have to cover optional features in > order to give us a degree of confidence. I refer back to the W3C > approach. > > Mark. > > >> >> Alastair >> >> Mark Little wrote: >>> We need to describe the tests for all features if we want to show >>> interoperability for those features. However, and the specific >>> case I have in mind is mixed outcome, which is not mandatory >>> under any circumstances, it shouldn't be a requirement for anyone >>> in the TC to test against because then it's effectively a >>> mandatory implementation (at least as far as the TC work is >>> concerned). It does not make sense to have optional features >>> covered by mandatory tests. Likewise, it does not make sense to >>> have optional features that aren't tested by at least 2 different >>> implementations, but that's a separate issue. >>> >>> Mark. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5 Sep 2006, at 14:41, Alastair Green wrote: >>> >>>> Unlike in WS-AT, where optional Completion protocol was a >>>> mandatory interop test. :-) >>>> >>>> Not sure of final outcome from F2F, but this point was >>>> discussed, and it was pointed out that in AT this approach was >>>> not taken. >>>> >>>> In my view the point of interop tests is not conformance, but to >>>> prove that the specs are workable -- a task which applies to all >>>> parts. >>>> >>>> Yrs, >>>> >>>> Alastair >>>> >>>> Mark Little wrote: >>>>> I'm assuming that any optional features in the specification >>>>> that are covered by tests in the interoperability scenarios >>>>> inherently means that those tests are also optional? Certainly >>>>> in W3C interoperability testing, only mandatory features have >>>>> to be tested. >>>>> >>>>> Mark. >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]