Answer:
The goal in this conversation is to be as concrete as possible, within time constraints.
The overall goal of having a hosted validator is to test conformance and interop by implementations, against the protocol's testable assertions.
Since the spec documents to date are incomplete, we can't get 100% of the way in the time allotted for the bounty program.
So given all this, the suggestion is to develop a draft (likely incomplete) test plan that highlights wherever more information is needed from the WG.
A good model is the SAML 2.0 test plan, but it had an advantage that UMA currently doesn't have: a conformance requirements document! This is something the group should put a priority on.
The overall goal of having a hosted validator is to test conformance and interop by implementations, against the protocol's testable assertions.
Since the spec documents to date are incomplete, we can't get 100% of the way in the time allotted for the bounty program.
So given all this, the suggestion is to develop a draft (likely incomplete) test plan that highlights wherever more information is needed from the WG.
A good model is the SAML 2.0 test plan, but it had an advantage that UMA currently doesn't have: a conformance requirements document! This is something the group should put a priority on.
| Previous Question | Next Question |
| What is Load/Performance Test Plan? | Who gives the assignment to test? |