Hi Craig,
Since you are looking at the conformance tests, I was wondering if you
could check out this request that came in the comments list - see
attached
email.
The first suggestion looks like a simple errata fix, but I looked at
the 2nd
and it has to do with the order of the arguments. It wasn't clear to me
that
the order was wrong (i.e. the writer says that first and second should
be
switched in core spec based on what he sees in conf tests.)
In any event, only suggesting if you have time and are already familiar
with the tests the writer is referring to, i.e. quick check if writer
is correct
and core spec needs errata, and if so we can submit as issue to handle
by editors.
Thanks,
Rich
Craig Forster wrote:
OF4F73B289.16B9D3F9-ON4A25743D.00065A71-4A25743D.00068A88@au1.ibm.com" type="cite">
Hi all,
I've gone ahead and updated the conformance tests for the dayTimeDuration
and yearMonthDuration DataType changes ONLY. The attached .ziparchive file
includes only the files that have changed.
(See attached file: conformance-updates.ziparchive)
Here is a list of the changed files:
conformance/policy/IIC102Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC103Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC104Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC105Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC106Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC107Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC150Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC151Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC152Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC153Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC154Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC155Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC156Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC157Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC231Policy.xml
conformance/policy/IIC232Policy.xml
conformance/request/IIC150Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC151Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC152Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC153Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC154Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC155Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC156Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC157Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC231Request.xml
conformance/request/IIC232Request.xml
Regards,
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Forster
Software Engineer
IBM Australia Development Labs
Argus == https://w3.webahead.ibm.com/w3ki/display/commonauthz/Home
Blog == http://blogs.tap.ibm.com/weblogs/craigforster/
---------------------------------------------------------------
From: Craig Forster/Australia/IBM@IBMAU
To: XACML TC <xacml@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 01/05/2008 09:58
Subject: [xacml] Updating XACML 2.0 conformance tests to meet errata
Hi all,
Are there any plans to update the XACML 2.0 conformance test suite to meet
the errata?
The primary issue that I'm seeing is the change of the dayTimeDuration and
yearMonthDuration DataType URIs, for example from
"http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xquery-operators-20020816#dayTimeDuration" to
"urn:oasis:names:tc:xacml:2.0:data-type:dayTimeDuration". These URI
changes cause 16 of the conformance tests to fail.
If the TC approves, I'm more than happy to update the conformance tests
myself.
Regards,
Craig
---------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Forster
Software Engineer
IBM Australia Development Labs
Argus == https://w3.webahead.ibm.com/w3ki/display/commonauthz/Home
Blog == http://blogs.tap.ibm.com/weblogs/craigforster/
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php