The detail in several of the group's documents were discussed today, in particular the new one concerning the formal semantics of POWDER and the Test Suite, both of which should be published as first working drafts very shortly. More than ever, each document depends on detail in another. Meanwhile work is progressing well with the XML Schema and datatypes that will aid the validation of POWDER docs.
The first half of the meeting picked up on the recent e-mail exchanges
[member only link] concerning the formal semantics model. The outstanding questions come down to things like: how important is it to be able to process non-Web URIs? Does a POWDER Processor necessarily have to support an extension mechanism such that it can process any POWDER-like document if the extension is declared properly or is it OK to require additional code? And is grouping by IP address and port number essential? If the answers to all these is no then it all gets much easier so, with time running out for the group, decisions need to be made about what really is essential and what is a nice to have. Many of these issues are really only coming to light as we tie down the details and start to work out actual tests we'll need to pass ourselves (never mind anyone else!).
It was the Test Suite that filled most of the remainder of the meeting. What exactly are we testing? It seems that there are two 'products' to test: the POWDER to POWDER-S transform and the POWDER Processor. We need to be clear about the difference between the Test Suite and Candidate Recommendation phase. A document that discusses the sub divisions of specifications
looks highly pertinent to both the formal semantics discussion and the Test Suite development. The suggestion was made that as well as providing test data we should also provide examples of predictable mistakes and how processors should handle them - the problem is that it's an open ended question and this seems unlikely to be included in the Test Suite.