Closed bermud closed 7 years ago
Try delineating the conformance classes using the ctl:profile tag, such that Queryable WMS depends on Basic WMS. The Q-WMS tests are only run if GetFeatureInfo
is advertised in the capabilities doc; they're skipped otherwise.
Regarding issue 1: So, the aim is to improve the code structure for developers and to enhance the comprehensibility of the structure of the test results for users?
Regarding issue 2: No, these are no conformance classes. They test the "Handling multi-dimensional data", which is described in Annex C (page 51) and Annex D (page 57). So, there is a reason to handle them separately.
@rjmartell: Thank you for the hint.
Next step: Create root elements for both CCs and 3 optional categories (Raster ELEVATION, Vector ELEVATION and TIME).
The adjustments are quite complex as the different CCs are distributed over several ctl script files. So, single tests have to be extracted to be able to group all test of a CC. Work is currently in progress: https://github.com/lat-lon/ets-wms13/tree/restructureTestsToRepresentCCs-4150
We continued with the refactoring of the tests (see previously mentioned branch).
Currently, following elements are on the root level of the ctl script:
These root elements derive from section "What is tested" of http://cite.opengeospatial.org/teamengine/about/wms/1.3.0/site/ .
Can you please review if this structure is fine for you?
Some proposed improvements:
Included solution for proposed improvements into feature branch.
Pull request #42 was created.
The feature branch was tested successfully and merged into master branch. It will be part of the upcoming release.
Issue 1: The specification talks bout 2 conformance classes: WMS Basic and Queryable WMS. We should refractor the test so the root parent in the CTL only has two children "WMS Basic" and "Queryable WMS".
Issue 2: We have these options in the test:
Are all these a conformance class or?