Hi Ant,

I was working on the basis that, for example, an SDO client -> JAXB
Composite using WS bindings would go though the AXIOM layer. If not it
wouldn't be too difficult to ad a specifc AXIOM set of tests (similar to
e4x-axiom) for the others if necessary... Is this sufficent, or do you think
we need sdo-axiom, jaxb-axiom) are explicitly needed ?

Cheers
On 26/02/07, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Was about to replying on the other thread but this one seems better ...
this
proposal sounds good to me. Over the weekend i added a JavaScript E4X
databinding [1], and plan in the future to also add ones for Ruby ReXML,
Python ElementTree, and perhaps something for Groovy as well. That could
make  itesting all the databinding combinations a little onerous, so
testing
specific combinations sounds good, eg  e4x uses axiom so just e4x-axiom
itests are probably enough if axiom is tested with all the others.

   ...ant

[1]

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/branches/sca-java-integration/sca/extensions/script/databinding.e4x/


On 2/26/07, Dan Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Althought the databinding-test project has been moved into the
testing/sca
> project, the tests themselves could do with some improvements.
>
> If people agree, I'd like to seperate them into a number of sub projects
> that test individual databindings (ie. a sperate project for each SDO,
> JAXB
> etc) and one or more to test interoperbillity between them (eg
SDO<->JAXB)
> using default and WS bindings. Initially these tests would focus on
client
> and inter composite transformations rather than inter component.
>
> I should be able to submitt them later this week, assuming it is felt
> better
> tests are approprite, and would be willing to try interlanguage later if
> needed (eg. Java SDO <-> Javascript or other composite/components).
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>

Reply via email to