[CITE-Forum] WFS 1.0.0 test failures do not provide descriptive error messages

Morris, Charles, E. chuck.morris at ngc.com
Tue Dec 4 14:58:31 EST 2007

OGC did install a fix for a problem with the validator about a week ago
that should have solved some of these problems.  If you have experienced
problems in the past, try it again.  If you are still getting tests that
fail, try validating the response using the standalone GML Validator at
http://cite.opengeospatial.org/test_engine/gml/2.1.2/validator/, which
should provide descriptive error messages.

- Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: cite-forum-bounces+chuck.morris=ngc.com at opengeospatial.org
[mailto:cite-forum-bounces+chuck.morris=ngc.com at opengeospatial.org] On
Behalf Of Normand Savard
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 10:47 AM
To: cite-forum at opengeospatial.org
Subject: Re: [CITE-Forum] WFS 1.0.0 test failures do not provide
descriptive error messages

Andrea Aime wrote:

>Tom Nuydens ha scritto:
>>I've been trying on and off to get our WFS implementation through the 
>>conformance tests. For WFS 1.0.0, our server passes the basic tests at

>>http://cite.opengeospatial.org/tsOGC/. With the newer TEAM engine 
>>tests, however, it fails all the DescribeFeatureType tests, apart from

>>those that are expected to produce a service exception.
>>The test engine does not return any kind of error message whatsoever 
>>for the failed tests. It simply echoes the response that it got from 
>>our server and then says "Result: Failed". I've validated the output 
>>of our server both using XML Spy and an internal Java app based on
>>Has anyone by any chance encountered similar problems? Without more 
>>detailed feedback from the test engine, I haven't a clue on how we can

>>get our tests to succeed. I already reported this problem via the 
>>e-mail address listed on the site (compliance at opengeospatial.org) some

>>time ago, but never got a reply.
>>Thanks in advance for any comments or suggestions.
>With GeoServer we are in the same boat, our DescribeFeatureType tests 
>do fail and we get no good reason. I think we already reported this but

>got no answer (I'm not sure since a colleague of mine did the report 
>and followed it).
I'm interested to know if there are any new developments on this issue.

I'm actually verifying if MapServer is OGC WFS basic compliant.   They 
are some tests that didn't pass on the TEAM Engine that passed on the
Legacy Engine conformance tests suite.  They are not any explanation
about the failures.


CITE-Forum mailing list
CITE-Forum at opengeospatial.org

More information about the CITE-Forum mailing list