Index Up Site Map Latest News Working Practices Discussion & Review Glossary Module Testing Non-Func. Testing Domains-Techniques Links Test Papers Feedback Administration

Mins of 12_02_03






1. Present               Graham Thomas, Isabel Evans, Lawrance Titterton, Margaret Saner, Neil Hudson, Richard Neeve, Stuart Reid.


Apologies:            Brian Hambling, George Wilkinson, John Kent, Julian Harty, Mark Robison, Peter Morgan.


2. Agree Agenda


03/2.1                      The agenda was agreed.


3. Technique reviews


3.1. Interoperability/e-business technique example review


                                The interoperability/e-business technique was the first of the new domain/technique examples to be reviewed at a Standards Working Party meeting.


                                Because the interoperability/e-business example is presented at a high level this initiated a discussion about the definition of Interoperability and the format that the example should take.


                                The meeting discussed the format of domain/technique examples and proposed the following layout:






0. Configuration


Title, Author, Version, Date.

1. Introduction


A brief description of the domain/technique example, giving an overview of the problem to be solved and the approach taken.

2. Requirements/Specification of System under Test


A description either as requirements or specification of the system under test (SUT) which this technique is being used on.

3. Test Design


Definition of the test case design technique and how to apply it.

4. Actual Test Cases


The test cases that are generated by applying the test design technique to the SUT.

5. Implementation of Test Cases


A brief discussion about how the test cases would be implemented. This is optional and need only be included for techniques where implementation of the test cases is a factor e.g. performance/stress.

6. Evaluation


How to analyse the results generated by implementing the test case. This section is optional and need only be included for techniques where evaluation of the results is a factor of their design e.g. performance/stress.

7. Scope for Automation


An optional note, if required, about additional considerations when automating test cases designed using this technique.

8. Conclusion/Summary


A conclusion/summary section for this domain/technique example.

(We are expecting that an example will be between 2 - 4 pages of A4 but can be longer. It should be readily understood by a tester who isn’t familiar with that area but who does have testing knowledge. The example may include other domains, (e.g. can cut across the domain/technique matrix horizontally), but it can not include other techniques. The example should be sanitised so that complexity or technical difficulty which isn’t relevant to the application of the technique is simplified to get across the purpose of the example.)


                                The discussion about the definition of Interoperability referred back to the minutes from the working party meeting on 20/07/03.

                                “The ability of 2 systems or components to pass information in 1 or more directions and to use the information that has been received.”


03/2.2                      Interoperability/e-business

- Stuart agreed to propose a definition for Interoperability.


- Stuart agreed to propose a definition for Systems Integration Testing.


New Action.



                                The meeting agreed to postpone the review of the Interoperability/e-business technique until after the definitions had been agreed.


3.1. Conversion/Database and Conversion/MIS technique example review


                                Isabel Evans, the example author, walked the meeting through the example with relevance to the comments received during the review period.


                                Additional comments were received during the discussion in the meeting and the following actions were agreed:


03/2.3                      Conversion/DB&MIS

- Isabel agreed to update the example in line with the comments received.


- Isabel offered to reformat the example in line with the proposed template (above).


New Action.




4. Living Glossary – Terms for Review


4.1. Test Condition


                                This term will be removed from the glossary because from the alternatives offered the meeting could not agree upon a definition.


4.2. Installability


                                The meeting agreed with the definition. This term will be added to the living glossary.


4.3. Installability Testing


                                The meeting adopted Marco Giromini’s comments about rewording. The reworded term will be added to the living glossary. 


4.4. Installation Guide


                                The term was reworded from the comments received and will be added to the living glossary.


4.5. Installation Wizard


                                The term was reworded from the comments received and will be added to the living glossary.



5. Minutes from the Previous Meeting


03/2.2                      The minutes from the previous meeting were agreed.



6. Actions from the Previous Meetings


02/2.7                      New Joiners Guide
Isabel Evans suggested the production of a guide for new joiners which could be posted on the Web Site. As Secretary Graham has direct contact with all new members so will look at this.
[30/07/02] The new joiners guide will be modified to fit in with the new approach.
Carried Forward.



02/5.6                      Glossary Update
Stuart requested that the term Test Condition be added to the glossary.
[10/12/02] It was suggested that all glossary additions/amendments be added to the Domain/Technique spreadsheet as an extra worksheet.


02/9.3                      Domain/Technique Matrix
Isabel volunteered to review existing examples with regard to being converted to domain/technique matrix examples.


02/9.4                      Website Admin
John agreed to post the Umbrella Document to the Standards Working Party website.


02/9.6                      Marketing Plan
Steve agreed to produce a marketing plan for the Standards Working Party to publicise the new approach that the group was taking.
[10/12/02] Steve agreed to produce the plan by the end of 2002, so that it could be reviewed by the working party in Jan 2003 prior to the first meeting of the year.


02/12.3                    Domain/Technique Matrix

- Graham to ask Jane Allerton (and Team) to convert the teams existing technique examples for Recovery Testing and Disaster Recovery Testing into Domain Technique examples.


- Graham to forward a copy of the Domain/Technique matrix spreadsheet to Stuart Reid.





02/12.4                    Website Review - Prototype
Stuart and Isabel agreed to take forward the design of the website for the new way of working. They would work together to build a prototype to be presented at the next meeting.


02/12.5                    Domain/Technique Example - Authors
Graham agreed to contact further members of the working party inviting them to become domain/technique example authors.


7. Appoint new Vice Chair


                                John Kent, the current Vice Chair of the Standards Working Party, has asked to take a sabbatical from the role over the coming months. The meeting asked for volunteers to fill the post. Lawrance Titterton kindly volunteered to take on the role of Vice Chair of the Standards Working Party.


                                We would like to take this opportunity to thank John for all the work he's put into the Standards Working Party as Vice Chair over the past three years. We wish him a speedy return to the group. He will be missed.


8. Agree future meeting schedule


                                The following meeting schedule was agreed:




1:00pm – 4:00pm


1:00pm – 4:00pm


1:00pm – 4:00pm


1:00pm – 4:00pm


9. Marketing Plan


                                The working Party would like to thank Steve Allott for his efforts in preparing a marketing plan for the group.


                                The meeting agreed with a number of points proposed in the plan, specifically with regard to raising the profile of the group by publishing articles and making presentations at seminars and conferences.


                                The discussion decided against producing hard copies of promotional material for two reasons, firstly there is no budget, and secondly this would create a snapshot (point in time) version of the work and was counter to the idea of producing living standards delivered via the internet.


                                The following additional points were added:

1.        Include links to other testing sites on website, as long as the linked site also includes a link back to

2.        We should investigate creating a logo for the group.

3.        Call for volunteers to write articles about the work of the group.


                                The following actions were agreed:

03/2.4                      Marketing

- Graham agreed to contact the working party and ask for volunteers to write articles publicising the work of the group.


- Request Steve Allott to put together a timetable for generating and publishing articles in the following publications:

                                The Tester
                                Professional Tester
                                Computing/Computer Weekly


- Consider a proposal for a Testing Standards Workshop at Eurostar03


- Add a promotional presentation to the website.


- Forward existing group presentations to Stuart to be loaded on the website.


- Request a speaking slot at a future BCS SIGiST event.


- Expand the website to include other material i.e. IEEE 610 and IEEE829, relevant papers and articles etc.


- Request Julian Harty to work out what copyright the group should apply to the material on the website.


- Margaret agreed to search the web for other standards material and testing sites that we could consider linking to.


New Action.



10. Any other business


                                Stuart reported that 7 new terms had been received from Erik Van Veenendaal and that these would be added to the website and included for review at the next meeting.


                                The cut-off date for reviewing domain/technique examples and glossary term definitions posted to the website ( prior to the next meeting on the 11th March 2003 has been set at 04/03/03, so please remember to post your comments using the website feedback form prior to this date.


11. Date of Next Meeting


The dates for future SWP meetings are listed below. The next meeting (11/03/03) will review the three domain/technique examples currently posted to the Latest News section of the website.






1:00pm – 4:00pm

Domain/Technique example review for:



1:00pm – 4:00pm

Domain/Technique example reviews (TBD)


1:00pm – 4:00pm

Domain/Technique example reviews (TBD)


1:00pm – 4:00pm

Domain/Technique example reviews (TBD)



                                The above meetings will take place at PA (Consulting), 4th Floor, 123 Buckingham Palace Road, London.


NB. All are welcome to attend, but must confirm attendance in advance with the secretary so that security passes can be arranged.



Graham Thomas





WP List

SIGIST Committee

By Request


Appendix A          Domain/Technique Matrix (16/02/03)