I agree... the principle that interoperability testing is useful (I
won't say necessary) is true. But doing it in a way that provides
preferential treatment to one testing company (Drummond) in this way
is not necessary. Things would have been much better had the industry
standardized on a suite of open source tests for as2 products and a
reasonable fee to certify that a product has passed the suite.
Alas, openness isn't common in this industry yet.
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Klaus-Dieter Naujok
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:18 PM, Dave Taylor wrote:
>
>> Get out your shovels and sand bags, 'cause here come a real tidal
>> wave.
>
> Dave,
>
> Thanks for passing on the information. Reading between the lines such
> as "For B2B applications [Open Source and COTS], full matrix testing
> and certification programs are necessary to identify and resolve all
> the interoperability problems" I am not surprised that DGI is
> expanding its market by creating the need for more testing. I wonder
> what took so long for DGI to lay the foundation to expand
> certification to all B2B applications, not just communications?
>
> As someone who has been in software development for the last 25+
> years, and having been the first to go through EDIINT testing with
> DGI, and before that with X.400 certification, I prefer "self testing"
> using a free and open test suite that can be used by developers,
> vendors and users alike. This type of testing has been common in many
> areas, such as ebXML using a test suite provided by NIST, resulting in
> top quality Open Source and/or COTS applications.
>
> One issue I have found with the way certification is done by DGI is
> that if the participants don't agree on the interpretation of the
> standard/specification, they agree to an ad-hoc "fix" in order to
> certify their interoperability amongst their application. In other
> words, DGI certification is not about being 100% in compliant with the
> standard/specification in question, it certifies that that application
> can interoperate with each other. Or to put it into EDI terms,
> certification does not certify that a set of EDI translators are 100%
> compliant with say UN/EDIFACT syntax, but do interoperate as long as
> they agree to the fix that the UNOA character set is not restricted to
> "Uppercase" characters only. The end result would be that a truly 100%
> compliant EDI application that is not certified by DGI would reject an
> interchange from a "certified" application. Do I have to say more?
>
> Maybe it is time for starters for us to work together on creating a
> open source AS2 test suite. Anyone interested?
>
> Klaus
>
>
------------------------------------
...
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>,
<JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>
Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS
REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
