[CITE-Forum] How do the CITE compliance tests typically respond to exensions?
lbermudez at opengeospatial.org
Fri Jun 20 10:10:12 EDT 2014
It depends on the test. If we know we are required to test extensions, then we will build the test for it.
Test for Spec allowing ad-hoc extensions:
- Conformance Class A: tests with no extensions
- Conformance Class B: tests extensions aren required additional input (like schematron or xsds that extend the originals xsds)
Or if the extension is important enough it should have its own test: Test for Extension XYZ of Spec ABC:
- Conformance Class A: tests the extension spec. Do not requires additional inputs as the previous one requires.
Luis Bermudez, Ph.D.
Director Compliance Program
Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
The OGC: Making Location Count
Tel: +1 301 760 7323
On Jun 20, 2014, at 8:14 AM, Scott Serich <Scott.Serich at ijis.org> wrote:
> I wasn’t sure whether I should bug Luis directly with this question or pose it to the broader forum. Forgive me if I made an incorrect choice.
> The question is this: how does a typical CITE compliance test respond to receiving an XML stream that contains additional elements that are not required? Would it typically cause the associated test to fail? Or would the test ignore the extraneous content? Or is it up to the underlying specification to make the choice?
> We’re struggling with this question in building a test harness for an OASIS standard (ECF), and I’m polling around for ideas. The standard itself is ambiguous.
> Scott Serich, PhD, JD
> Lead Technical Architect, IJIS Institute
> 44983 Knoll Square, Ashburn, VA 20147-2692
> 703.283.3432 -- scott.serich at ijis.org -- www.ijis.org
> CITE-Forum mailing list
> CITE-Forum at lists.opengeospatial.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CITE-Forum