1 / 6

GGF 16 InteropFest BoF

GGF 16 InteropFest BoF. Glenn Wasson University of Virginia. InteropFests In Which We Participated. WSRF / WSN InteropFests 2003 at IBM, Raleigh, NC 2005? via the web Based around scenario documents Running example that involves specs messages. InteropFests In Which We Participated.

naiara
Download Presentation

GGF 16 InteropFest BoF

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GGF 16 InteropFest BoF Glenn Wasson University of Virginia

  2. InteropFests In Which We Participated • WSRF / WSN InteropFests • 2003 at IBM, Raleigh, NC • 2005? via the web • Based around scenario documents • Running example that involves specs messages

  3. InteropFests In Which We Participated • First was a kick-off to the OASIS WGs • “Show of support” in the formation of the WGs • Roughly a dozen independent implementations (in various states) • Equal mix of industry and academia/government • Second was pre-public comment testing • Last check before “release” • 6 (ish) implementations • 75% / 25% industry to academia/government

  4. First InteropFest • “Developers in a room” variety • Scenario document described specific tests • Matrix of check boxes • What was interesting? • Understanding of time (.NET could parse lots of serializations of time, but only generate one) • Have to push this back in the spec (i.e. you must accept time in the following formats) • Small changes in messages can require large changes in infrastructure

  5. Second InteropFest • Remote “Publish your URLs” variety • Again, had scenario document • More disconnected / Less frenetic coding • What was interesting? • Harder to test clients • Theory → everyone tests their own clients against your service • Practice → it’s easier to run everyone else’s clients against your service

  6. Lessons? • Dev-in-room more productive per unit time • Typical F2F vs. telecon trade-offs • Spec-wise legal WSDL / XSD ≠ Good • Without tooling support, forget it • Interop tests can find these issues • Easy to get caught in “client/service on same platform” trap • Spec changes can come out of interop tests! • This is what we want… but spec authors can resist…

More Related