home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Submitted-by: jsh@usenix.org (Jeffrey S. Haemer)
-
- An Update on UNIX1-Related Standards Activities
-
- October 1, 1990
-
- USENIX Standards Watchdog Committee
-
- Jeffrey S. Haemer, Report Editor
-
- IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods
-
- Doris Lebovits <lebovits@attunix.att.com> reports on the July 16-20
- meeting in Danvers, MA:
-
- Overview
-
- Dot three's job is to do test methods for all of the other 1003
- standards. The group's work, whose first parts are now in ballot,
- specifies the requirements for OS conformance testing for our industry
- and for NIST. This makes our balloting group, our technical
- reviewers, and our schedules worth watching. Pay attention, also, to
- what comes out of the Steering Committee on Conformance Testing
- (SCCT). Their projects and decisions will be interesting and
- important.
-
- This was the working group's seventeenth meeting. As usual, we
- reviewed the ballot status of P1003.1 test methods, worked on P1003.2
- test methods and reviewed steering committee activities. Technical
- reviews were done on parts I and II and the group developed assertions
- for part III. Participants from the usual companies attended (AT&T,
- NIST, OSF, Mindcraft, IBM, DEC, HP, Data General, Cray Research,
- Unisys, Perennial, and Unisoft, Ltd.), as did an assortment of P1003.2
- members (see below).
-
- Document structure
-
- Currently, our evolving document has three parts: Part I is generic
- test methods, Part II is test methods for measuring P1003.1
- conformance, including test assertions, and Part III contains test
- methods and assertions for measuring P1003.2 conformance.
-
- After the ballot, each part will become a separate standard. Part I
- will be published as IEEE P1003.3, Part II as IEEE P1003.3.1, and Part
- III as IEEE P1003.3.2.
-
- __________
-
- 1. UNIXTM is a Registered Trademark of UNIX System Laboratories in
- the United States and other countries.
-
- October 1, 1990 Standards Update IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods
-
-
- - 2 -
-
- Ballot status
-
- Draft 11 of the current ballot, which was recirculated to the
- (approximately) ninety-member balloting group late in February, closed
- balloting March 23. Of the respondents, 19 disapproved with
- substantive negative comments. This met the two-thirds response
- requirement, but falls short of the needed two-thirds approval.
-
- A recirculation ballot for P1003.3 Draft 12, which is the revision of
- Part I of Draft 11, began August 28 and is expected to close September
- 28, 1990. The recirculation of P1003.3.1 Draft 12 (Part II) will be
- conducted at a later date.
-
- On the first and last days, the technical reviewers worked on ballot
- objections to Part I and Part II. All Part I objections and most Part
- II objections were resolved. The definition of an untested assertion
- was reviewed and a permanent rationale will be included in Part I.
-
- P1003.2 verification
-
- This was our fifth meeting working on the verification standard for
- the P1003.2 standard. The assertion writing and review were done
- jointly with the P1003.2 working group.
-
- The whole P1003.3 and P1003.2 working groups worked jointly on
- defining test assertions based on P1003.2 Draft 10. They worked in
- three small breakout groups. The joint group (P1003.2 plus P1003.3)
- also met in plenary session several times to discuss progress and
- small-group issues. Progress was slow in the beginning, since most of
- the P1003.2 working group were not familiar with test assertions. but
- by the end of the week we had discussed and resolved several issues.
- Some examples:
-
- - Do we need to state assertions in P1003.3.2 explicitly that
- duplicate P1003.3.1? (Yes.)
-
- - Must we test locale variables for every locale-sensitive
- interface? (They should be tested when their behavior is clearly
- stated for a utility.)
-
- - Should assertions for multiple operands be consistent? (Yes.)
-
- Lowell Johnson (Unisys) is Secretary of the P1003.2 Test Methods
- activities, and Andrew Twigger (Unisoft Ltd) is Technical Editor. Ray
- Wilkes, the former Chair, has changed jobs and is no longer able to
- attend regularly, so Roger Martin is actively looking for a
- replacement.
-
- October 1, 1990 Standards Update IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods
-
-
- - 3 -
-
- Steering Committee on Conformance Testing (SCCT)
-
- The SCCT is supposed to alleviate the increasing dot-three work load
- that all the other proliferating groups are creating. Their job is
- coordinating the activities of all test-methods groups, monitoring
- their conformance to test methods, and writing Project Authorization
- Requests (PARs). Currently, its members are Roger Martin (NIST,
- Steering Committee Chair), Anita Mundkur (HP), Andrew Twigger (Unisoft
- Ltd), Bruce Weiner (Mindcraft), Lowell Johnson (Unisys) and the newest
- member, John Williams (GM). That there is a new member in the
- steering committee is very important, especially because John is from
- GM, the largest user voice other than the U.S. government.
-
- The steering committee did not have anything for the working group to
- review. It is still documenting procedures, and Roger is still
- clarifying which standards the working group will address.
-
- October 1, 1990 Standards Update IEEE 1003.3: Test Methods
-
- Volume-Number: Volume 21, Number 162
-
-