1. Overview of the ETSI Test Description Language
Andreas Ulrich (Rapporteur) Siemens AG
© ETSI All rights reserved
2nd MBT User Conference 2012 Tallinn, Estonia
September 25–27, 2012

2. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Overview
What can I do with TDL?
How is TDL designed?
How does TDL compare to other approaches?
How does TDL look like to users?
What comes next?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

3. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
What can I do with TDL?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

4. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Purpose of TDL
Scope
Distributed, concurrent, reactive real-time systems
Black-box testing
Indifferent to application domains
Telecommunication / automotive / avionics / automation / others
Different, user-definable testing languages
Application scenarios
Manual specification of tests from use cases, user stories etc.
Intermediate representation of automatically generated tests
Representing output from MBT tools
Generation of
Executable tests
Test documentation
Visualization of test logs
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

5. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
TDL Specifies…
Interactions between SUT/tester at observable interfaces (only)
System inputs/outputs: messages, calls, signals
Expected flow of interactions
Sequential, alternative, concurrent, recurrent behavior, etc.
Mock-up (default) behavior, others
Timing constraints
System response time (system in/out, out/out constraints)
Tester reaction time (system out/in constraints)
Test data
Concrete values
Constraints on valid test data, i.e. ranges or intervals
Parameterization of test specifications
Individual test cases
Entire test suites
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

6. An Application Scenario Example for TDL
Test Purpose Spec (ExTRA)
System Model (State Chart)
Automatic Test Case
Generation
Manual Derivation
In Syntax #1
Test Case Spec (TDL)
Test Documentation (MS Word)
Generation
In Syntax #2
Automatic Code
Generation
Executable Tests (TTCN-3)
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

7. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
How is TDL designed?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

8. Ingredients of a Software Language
Abstract
Syntax
(abstract syntax graph,
meta-model)
Concrete
Syntax
(syntax tree, BNF grammar)
Formal
Semantics
(transitional or
operational sem.)
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

9. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Coverage by TDL
Abstract
Syntax
Standardized, incl.
extension capabilities
Concrete
Syntax
Formal
Semantics
Informative, by example only
Standardized
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

10. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Using TDL
Static analysis
Consistency checks,
visualization
Common TDL meta-model
Test concepts expressed in
a single abstract syntax
Test generation
Transformation
Abstract test descriptions
Various user-defined syntaxes,
e.g. graphical, tabular, textual
Executable tests
Various test environments and
languages, e.g. TTCN-3, C#
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

11. Definition of the TDL Meta-Model
In fact, two approaches exist
OMG’s UML/MOF
International standard
Complex
Eclipse Modeling Framework (EMF) Ecore
Simpler than MOF
Good tool support
For practicability reasons, TDL meta-model will be based on a subset of Ecore
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

12. TDL is Adjustable by User
TDL meta-model can be extended by a user if need arises
TDL concrete syntax may cover only parts of the meta-model
User extensions of the TDL meta-model can be subjected to further TDL standardization and maintenance
Extends
Partially implements
User-defined
concrete syntax
TDL meta-model w/
user extensions
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

13. How does TDL look like to users?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

14. Examples in Possible TDL Concrete Syntax
Sequential test with multiple SUT ports
Structured test with default behavior
Note: Examples only, concrete syntax is defined by user!
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

15. Examples in Possible TDL Concrete Syntax
A concurrent test in graphical and textual notation
testcase joinTC() {
UCAROL ! join(Carol, room1);
par {
{ BOB ? joinPDU(Carol, ?); BOB ! joinPDU(Bob, room1) },
{ ALICE ? joinPDU(Carol, ?); ALICE ! joinPDU(Alice, room1) } };
UCAROL ? joined() }
A test suite model
Note: Examples only, concrete syntax is defined by user!
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

16. How does TDL compare to other approaches?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

17. TDL vs. UML Testing Profile
UTP
Focus on test descriptions of tester/SUT interactions
Various concrete syntaxes
Precise semantics
Common meta-model for tests fosters reuse of tests and tools
Amendable to user’s needs – extension, reduction of scope
Wide scope inherited from UML, covers all kinds of test modeling
Graphical language
Semantics relies on UML
Tool-specific solutions, models hardly transferrable
Captures not all needs, further profiles needed, e.g. MARTE
The semantic fuzz of UML
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

18. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
TDL vs. TTCN-3
TDL
TTCN-3
Test specification level
Captures requirements on a tester w.r.t. SUT behavior
Leaves room for various tester code generation strategies
Clean test spec possible – level of detail adjustable by user
Supports validation of test spec due to concise semantics
Test execution level
Detailed tester implementation, incl. tester internal behavior
Captures the user intension of an executable tester
Tester code sometimes cluttered, unreadable
Validation hard due to complex semantics
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

19. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Business Value of TDL
Provides guidance to users to define ‘their’ test language (concrete syntax) based on common concepts (TDL abstract syntax)
Graphical UML-like / textual / tabular representation of tests
Enables tool vendors to develop specialized test generation tools from common abstract test model
Generation of TTCN-3 / Java/JUnit test code / test documentation
Generation of sequential tests / concurrent tests
Enables provision of analysis tools independent from a concrete user language
Consistency checker
Analysis for system input/output races
Offers a way to exchange of test specs at an abstract level
Common meta-model for all kind of tests
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

20. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
What comes next?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

21. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Status & Outlook
Achievements so far
Identification of the purpose and business value of TDL
Collection of related work
Discussion on TDL features
Next steps
Agreement on TDL core features
Design of the TDL meta-model
Validate the TDL concepts in a tool
 Make a (draft) ETSI standard on TDL available in 2013!
Do you want to join?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

22. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Acknowledgments
So far, the TDL initiative has attracted quickly 30+ persons and different organisations from industry, tool providers, and research from inside and outside of ETSI. The rapporteur of this activity is thankful for the many stimulating and controversial discussions by various people to lay out the cornerstones of TDL! Siemens AG acknowledges partial funding of this activity from the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking, grant agreement no and the German BMBF.
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

23. Thank you! Your questions?