Abstract
Deployment of model-based testing involves many difficulties that have slowed down its industrial adoption. The leap from traditional scripted testing to model-based testing seems as hard as moving from manual to automatic test execution. Two key factors in the deployment are the language used to define the test models, and the language used for defining the test objectives. Based on our experience, we survey the different types of languages and sketch solutions based on different approaches, considering the testing organization, the system under test, etc. The types of languages we cover include among others domain-specific, test-specific as well as generic design languages. We note that there are no best practices, but provide general guidelines for various cases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
OMG: Model Driven Architecture. Available at http://www.omg.org/mda/ (2006)
Domain-Specific Modeling Forum: DSM case studies and examples (2006), Available at http://www.dsmforum.org/cases.html
Robinson, H.: Obstacles and opportunities for model-based testing in an industrial software environment. In: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Model-Driven Software Engineering, Nuremberg, Germany, pp. 118–127 (2003)
Baker, P., Loh, S., Weil, F.: Model-driven engineering in a large industrial context – Motorola case study. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 476–491. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Hartman, A., Kirshin, A., Olvovsky, S.: Model driven testing – as an infrastructure for custom made solutions. In: Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on System Testing and Validation (STV’06), Potsdam, Germany (2006)
Nachmanson, L., et al.: Optimal strategies for testing nondeterministic systems. In: ISSTA’04: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis, Boston, MA, USA, pp. 55–64. ACM Press, New York (2004)
Campbell, C., et al.: Testing concurrent object-oriented systems with Spec Explorer. In: Fitzgerald, J.A., Hayes, I.J., Tarlecki, A. (eds.) FM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3582, pp. 542–547. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Jard, C., Jéron, T.: TGV: theory, principles and algorithms – a tool for the automatic synthesis of conformance test cases for non-deterministic reactive systems. STTT 7, 297–315 (2005)
Hartman, A.: AGEDIS project final report (2004), Available at http://www.agedis.de/documents/FinalPublicReport%28D1.6%29.PDF
Apfelbaum, L., Doyle, J.: Model based testing. In: Software Quality Week (1997)
Farchi, E., Hartman, A., Pinter, S.: Using a model-based test generator to test for standard conformance. IBM Systems Journal 41, 89–110 (2002)
Modelware: Modelware project homepage (2006), Available at http://www.modelware-ist.org
OMG: UML Testing Profile (2006), Available at http://www.omg.org/technology/documents/formal/test_profile.htm
ETSI: TTCN-3 homepage (2006), Available at http://www.ttcn-3.org
MetaCase: MetaEdit+ homepage (2006), Available at http://www.metacase.com
Xactium: XMFMosaic homepage (2006), Available at http://www.xactium.com
Katara, M., et al.: Towards deploying model-based testing with a domain-specific modeling approach. In: Proceedings of TAIC PART - Testing: Academic & Industrial Conference, Windsor, UK, pp. 81–89. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2006)
Buwalda, H.: Action figures. STQE Magazine, 42–47 (March/April 2003) (2003)
Kervinen, A., Maunumaa, M., Katara, M.: Controlling testing using three-tier model architecture. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Model Based Testing (MBT 2006). ENTCS, vol. 164(4), pp. 53–66 (2006)
Sinha, A., Smidts, C.: HOTTest: A model-based test design technique for enhanced testing of domain-specific applications. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 15, 242–278 (2006)
Behm, M., et al.: Industrial experience with test generation languages for processor verification. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual conference on Design Automation (DAC-04), San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 36–40. ACM Press, New York (2004)
Hyrkkänen, A.: General purpose SUT adapter for TTCN-3. Master’s thesis, Tampere University of Technology, Department of Information Technology (2005)
Abouzahra, A., Bézivin, J.: Didonet Del Fabro, M., Jouault, F.: A practical approach to bridging domain specific languages with UML profiles. In: Proceedings of the Best Practices for Model Driven Software Development at OOPSLA’05, San Diego, California, USA (2005)
UniTesK: UniTesK tools homepage (2006), Available at http://www.unitesk.com
ETSI: Conformance test specification for SIP – part 3: Abstract test suite (TTCN-3 code) (2003), Available at http://portal.etsi.org/docbox/EC_Files/EC_Files/ts_10202703v030101p0.zip
IETF: IETF RFC 3261 – SIP: Session Initiation Protocol (2002), Available at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3261.txt
Kaner, C., Bach, J., Pettichord, B.: Lessons Learned in Software Testing. Wiley, Chichester (2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hartman, A., Katara, M., Olvovsky, S. (2007). Choosing a Test Modeling Language: A Survey. In: Bin, E., Ziv, A., Ur, S. (eds) Hardware and Software, Verification and Testing. HVC 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4383. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70889-6_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70889-6_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70888-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70889-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)