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?
What are the concepts behind TDL?
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
Black-box testing of distributed communicating real-time systems
Design/representation of test descriptions before implementing them
Using different representation syntaxes
Indifferent to application domains
Telecommunication / automotive / avionics / automation / others
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. An Application Scenario Example for TDL
Test Purpose Spec (ExTRA)
System Model (State Chart)
Automatic Test Case
Generation
Manual Derivation
In Syntax #1
Test Description (TDL)
Test Documentation (MS Word)
Generation
In Syntax #2
Automatic Code
Generation
Executable Tests (TTCN-3)
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

6. 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)
Abstract test data
Relevant values
Constraints on test data, i.e. ranges or intervals
Parameterization of test descriptions
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

7. What are the concepts behind TDL?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

8. Ingredients of a Software Language
Abstract
Syntax
(abstract syntax graph,
meta-model)
Concrete
Syntax
(syntax tree, BNF grammar)
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
At least one standardized representation
Semantics
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. TDL is Adjustable by User
TDL concrete syntax may cover only parts of the meta-model
TDL meta-model can be extended by a user if need arises
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

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

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

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

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

16. TDL vs. UML Testing Profile
UTP
Focus on test descriptions of tester/SUT interactions
Various concrete syntaxes
Common meta-model with semantics 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
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

17. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
TDL vs. TTCN-3
TDL
TTCN-3
Abstract test specification level – low level of detail
Captures requirements on a tester w.r.t. SUT behavior
Leaves room for various tester code generation strategies
Lower test execution level – high level of detail
Detailed tester implementation, incl. tester internal behavior
Captures the user intension of an executable tester
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

18. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
Business Value of TDL
Support to test design before rushing to test code
Better quality of tests
Higher productivity in testing
Common meta-model for all kind of tests descriptions
Enabled development of specialized tools for
Generation of executable test code using different strategies
Test documentation and visualization
Analysis of test descriptions
Offers a way to exchange test descriptions
Support for customized test languages (concrete TDL syntax)
Graphical,
Textual,
Tabular representation of tests
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

19. 2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia
What comes next?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

20. 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
First draft of TDL covering core features
Definition of the TDL meta-model
Validation of TDL in a reference implementation
 Make a stable draft of the ETSI standard on TDL available in 2013!
Do you want to join?
2nd MBTUC 2012, Tallinn, Estonia

21. 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

22. Thank you! Your questions?