Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 5202 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2002 20:59:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by 209.66.108.5 with SMTP; 1 Jul 2002 20:59:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 8888 invoked by uid 97); 1 Jul 2002 21:00:03 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 8796 invoked by uid 97); 1 Jul 2002 21:00:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 8778 invoked by uid 98); 1 Jul 2002 21:00:02 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Message-ID: <00ba01c22141$eeeb8b00$9865fea9@spiritsoft.com> From: "James Strachan" To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" References: <001e01c21f97$59f29cb0$0200a8c0@octovma> <076d01c22008$99976be0$9865fea9@spiritsoft.com> <20020701114732.I12637@snow.socialchange.net.au> <0ba401c220f2$771cb620$9865fea9@spiritsoft.com> <20020701131732.GA4503@expresso.localdomain> Subject: Re: [jelly] http and validation tag libraries Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 19:38:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Rating: 209.66.108.5 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: 209.66.108.5 1.6.2 0/1000/N From: "Jeff Turner" > I'll give that a try. The thing is, everyday functional testing doesn't > seem to *need* Jelly's XML pipelining, expression language, or > procedural flow control. So far, I've found Ant's declarative style to > suit functional testing quite well, and it's other deficiencies are > work-aroundable. Agreed - I don't think a lot of functonal testing *needs* Jelly though it'll be interesting to see what kind of things can be done. Certainly its for 'advanced stuff' really. > Yet I can see that Jelly's capabilities, like iterating through XML, may > prove very useful for advanced functional testing. There may be > operations like "fetch a WSDL doc, drill down till you hit the ports, > test each port". Some use-cases like this would help make the goals > clear. Well said. I think when the SOAP scripting & testing stuff is working, the use cases will become more clear. Especially when folks can create tag-macros for working with SOAP/WSDL/WSIF as well with 'Velocity' (well Jexl really) & XPath, while mixing and matching Ant tasks & AntEater and JSTL we'll have a pretty powerful scripting/testing tool. In a couple of weeks I think the use-cases of Jelly will become much more clear. James _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: