W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tt@w3.org > June 2015

Re: [imsc] WBS survey on implementation report

From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:27:21 +0200
Message-ID: <557AA5F9.9070805@w3.org>
To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>, W3C Public TTWG <public-tt@w3.org>


On 11/06/2015 17:29, Nigel Megitt wrote:
> Hi Thierry,
>
> On q2 isn't there a format that allows mail clients to repopulate the
> subject field with [imsc]? It'd be good to use that, to lower the 'pain'.

Ok Done.
>
> The options don't all completely make sense on the tests. Now you have the
> question optional, and the choices are "Pass", "Fail" and "Not
> implemented". By definition "Not implemented" and "Fail" are synonymous.

For the implementor responding to the WBS
- "Fail" means test is implemented bu the result is  ot good.
- "Not implemented"" means feature is not supported in the tool


But for us I agree that "Fail" or "Not implemented" are synonymous. We 
only count the "Pass" for exit criteria.

I
> suggest changing "Not implemented" to "Not tested".

Done.
>
> Do we need to specify an end date for this? If so, I do not know when a
> sensible date would be - perhaps this is one for Pierre to propose?

I am not sure we need a closing date.
Once we have fullfill the CR exit criteria with two passing 
implementations for each test, we are done. At that point we can either 
leave the WBS open or close it.

So far I have put an ending date to 2017.
Maybe you want to stress people a bit and mention a much shorter end 
date (we can chnge that date anytime if we want to extend).

Thierry


>
> Kind regards,
>
> Nigel
>
>
Received on Friday, 12 June 2015 09:27:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 5 October 2017 18:24:23 UTC