On the subject of interop, what are we going to do about some form of
compliance suite? We will need to define the range of interop expected,
because I guess both Java and C++ implementations interpret things which are
not covered by the spec. I am quite sure we do this in different ways.
I think it would only be sensible to test interop within the specified
behaviour,  and highlight as we go along where the specification is open to
interpretation.

cheers,
Ed.


On 03/05/06, Edward Slattery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 Can the Java SDO handle the Primer sample without moidification? The C++
one certainly cannot as it uses ecore: stuff , which I dont have.

cheers,
Ed.


 On 03/05/06, kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There's a pair of files called "Primer.xsd" and "PrimerSample.xml" which
> I
> have used in the past which come from Eclipse EMF and
> is as comprehensive in its coverage of schema as I have ever
> needed.  I'm
> not sure how we stand on being able to distribute these as part of the
> test
> suite in Tuscany.  A quick google shows the files available from the
> article
>
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/article.php?id=3666&group=eclipse.tools.emf
> as attachments
>
> 
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/attachment.php?group=eclipse.tools.emf&id=3666&attachment=2
> and
>
> 
http://www.eclipse.org/newsportal/attachment.php?group=eclipse.tools.emf&id=3666&attachment=3
>
> With regards to sharing change histories,  I imagine the primary use
> case
> for change histories is when you give a give a modified graph back to
> the
> "same" DAS for writing back to the original source. So I in terms of
> cross
> language interoperability I would extrapolate that the scenario we would
> be
> supporting would be that of fairly tightly coupled DAS implementations,
> all
> accessing the same source.  I may be wrong, but It doesn't sound like a
> frequently encountered scenario, so whilst it sounds like goodness, it
> wouldn't be at the top of my priority list.
>
> I don't have a strong feeling yet for the shape of tests we should do,
> but
> perhaps we could talk about which interop tests we want to do on the IRC
> channel in the next regular slot (I'm assuming that's Monday May 8th,
> at:
> 15:30 GMT, 16:30 BST, 08:30am PST, 11:30am EDT, 21:00 Bangalore)
>
> Cheers, kelvin.
>
> On 5/2/06, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I spent a little time getting familiar with PHP/SDO and had some more
> > thoughts about cross language interop testing. For SDO the most basic
> test
> > is to read and write an XML file from PHP/JAVA/C++ and compare the
> > results.
> > We could develop this to test other functions such as creating,
> updating
> > and
> > deleting content and again comparing the content from the different
> > implementations. Assuming we start with the same input we would expect
> the
> > outputs to be compatible.
> >
> > Is there an XML file somewhere that contains the full set of supported
>
> > types
> > and type constructs?
> >
> > Where relational DASs are implemented Similar tests could be carried
> out
> > with relational data ensuring that type conversions are performed
> > accurately
> > and consistently across implementations by reading out of a database
> and
> > printing out the data for comparison or by inserting back into a
> database
> > for comparison.
> >
> > We could also look at how consistently the implementations convert
> from
> > one
> > DAS type to another but I guess this is not strictly an
> interoperability
> > issue.
> >
> > Is there an intention that SDO change histories will be shared? If so
> this
> > is something else that you could expect to be transferred across
> language
> > boundaries and hence we should think about how to test this.
> >
> > Once the work is done to have C++ support Axis2 we should do some SCA
> > interop testing also. In the near term we could do some basic testing
> > based
> > on SDO/axiom conversions if it's thought that to be worth it.
> >
> > I'm happy to spend time setting up tests if we can agree which ones
> are
> > required.
> >
> > Thoughts
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Simon
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Kelvin Goodson
>
>

Reply via email to