From 824a6db3ff111f8d2427ac5adad0362bf078630a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Bj=C3=B6rn=20Gustavsson?= The OASIS XML Conformance Subcommittee is concerned with
+ improving the quality of XML processors. The tests described in this
+ document provide a set of metrics to determine how well a
+ particular implementation conforms to the
+ W3C XML 1.0 (Second Edition) Recommendation .
+ The XML Conformance Test Suite is intended
+ to complement the W3C XML 1.0 (Second Edition) Recommendation. All interpretations of
+ this Recommendation are subject to confirmation by the
+ W3C XML Coordination Group.
+
+ Conformance tests can be used by developers, content creators, and
+ users alike to increase their level of confidence in product quality. In
+ circumstances where interoperability is necessary, these tests can also
+ be used to determine that differing implementations support the same set
+ of features. This report provides supporting documentation for all of the tests
+ contributed by members of the OASIS XML Conformance Subcommittee.
+ Sources from which these tests have been collected
+ include:
+ Comments/suggestions should be
+ forwarded to the XML Conformance Subcommittee Chair, Mary Brady <mbrady@nist.gov>. Two basic types of test are presented here. These are
+ respectively Binary Tests
+ and Output Tests. Binary conformance tests are documents which
+ are grouped into one of four categories. Given a document
+ in a given category, each kind of XML parser must treat it
+ consistently and either accept it (a positive test)
+ or reject it (a negative test). It is in that sense
+ that the tests are termed "binary". The XML 1.0 (Second Edition) Recommendation
+ talks in terms of two types of XML processor:
+ validating ones, and nonvalidating ones.
+ There are two differences between these types of processors: There are two types of such entity, parameter
+ entities holding definitions which affect validation
+ and other processing; and general entities which
+ hold marked up text. It will be appreciated that there are
+ then five kinds of XML processor: validating processors,
+ and four kinds of nonvalidating processor based on the
+ combinations of external entity which they include. At this time, the XML community primarily uses parsers
+ which are in the rightmost two columns of this table, calling
+ them Well Formed XML Parsers (or "WF Parsers") and
+ Validating XML Parsers. A second test matrix
+ could be defined to address the variations in the types of
+ of XML processor which do not read all external entities.
+ That additional matrix is not provided here at this time. The XML 1.0 (Second Edition) Recommendation places a number of requirements
+ on XML processors, to ensure that they report information to
+ applications as needed. Such requirements are testable.
+ Validating processors are required to report slightly more
+ information than nonvalidating ones, so some tests will
+ require separate output files. Some of the information that
+ must be reported will not be reportable without reading all
+ the external entities in a particular test. Many of the tests for
+ valid documents are paired with an output file to ensure that
+ the XML processor provides the correct information. The output of these tests is provided in two forms, as
+ described in SUN Microsystems XML
+ Canonical Forms. At present, the James Clark
+ collection provides corresponding output in First XML
+ Canonical Form, and the SUN Microsystems
+ collection provides corresponding output in Second XML
+ Canonical Form. When the
+ W3C XML Group finalizes its work on Canonical XML, these
+ output files will be updated.
+ This section of this report contains descriptions of test
+ cases, each of which fits into the categories noted above.
+ Each test case includes a document of one of the types in the
+ binary test matrix above (e.g. valid or invalid documents).
+ In some cases, an output file , as
+ described in Section 2.2, will also be associated with
+ a valid document, which is used for output testing. If such
+ a file exists, it will be noted at the end of the description
+ of the input document. The description for each test case is presented as a two
+ part table. The right part describes what the test does.
+ This description is intended to have enough detail to evaluate
+ diagnostic messages. The left part includes:
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ A Joint Development Effort
+ OASIS XML Conformance Subcommittee
+
XML 1.0 Test Suite, Second Edition
Working Draft
15 March 2001
+
+
+
+
+ Table of Contents
+
+
+
+
+
+ 1. Introduction
+ 2. Test Matrix
+
+ 2.1 Binary Tests
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ Test Document Type v. Parser Type
+
+
+
+
+ Nonvalidating
+ Validating
+
+
+
+ External Entities
+
Ignored (3 cases)External Entities
+
Read
+
+
+ Valid Documents
+ accept
+ accept
+ accept
+
+
+
+ Invalid Documents
+ accept
+ accept
+ reject
+
+
+
+ Non-WF Documents
+ reject
+ reject
+ reject
+
+
+
+ WF Errors tied
+
+ to External Entityaccept
+
(varies)reject
+ reject
+
+
+
+ Documents with
+
Optional Errors(not specified)
+ (not specified)
+ (not specified)
+ 2.2 Output Tests
+
+ 3. Test Case Descriptions
+
+
+
+
Note that the output format of this report is subject + to change. Also, since XSL does not currently support the + type of sorting rule necessary to make section numbers like + 2.12 appear after 2.2, the ordering is not quite what is + desired.
+ + +All conforming XML 1.0 Processors are + required to accept valid documents, reporting no + errors. In this section of this test report are found + descriptions of test cases which fit into this category.
+ +All conforming XML 1.0 Validating Processors + are required to report recoverable errors in the case + of documents which are Invalid. Such errors are + violations of some validity constraint (VC).
+ +If a validating processor does not report an error when + given one of these test cases, or if the error reported is + a fatal error, it is not conformant. If the error reported + does not correspond to the problem listed in this test + description, that could also be a conformance problem; it + might instead be a faulty diagnostic.
+ +All conforming XML 1.0 Nonvalidating Processors + should accept these documents, reporting no errors.
+ +All conforming XML 1.0 Processors are required to + report fatal errors in the case of documents which are not + Well Formed. Such errors are basically of two types: + (a) the document violates the XML grammar; or else + (b) it violates a well formedness constraint + (WFC). There is a single exception to that + requirement: nonvalidating processors which do not read + certain types of external entities are not required to detect + (and hence report) these errors.
+ +If a processor does not report a fatal error when given + one of these test cases, it is not conformant. If the error + reported does not correspond to the problem listed in this + test description, that could also be a conformance problem; + it might instead be a faulty diagnostic.
+ +Conforming XML 1.0 Processors are permitted to ignore + certain errors, or to report them at user option. In this + section of this test report are found descriptions of + test cases which fit into this category.
+ +Processor behavior on such test cases does not affect + conformance to the XML 1.0 (Second Edition) Recommendation, except as noted.
+ +A team of volunteer members have participated in the + development of this work. Contributions have come from: +
+End
+ + + + +
|
+
+ There is an output test associated with this + input file. + |
+