W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > December 2001

Re: Draft Minutes 2001-12-06 QA Working Group Teleconference

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:32:57 +0100
Message-Id: <200112080034.fB80YBe19553@mail.24-7webhosting.com>
Cc: <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
To: "Kirill Gavrylyuk" <kirillg@microsoft.com>
comments inlined

general remark: my name is misspoelled at some points, it should be 
Dimitris

On Friday, December 7, 2001, at 07:15  PM, Kirill Gavrylyuk wrote:

> Please review the minutes before we send them to www-qa@w3.org. Thanks!
>
> Draft Minutes 2001-12-06 QA Working Group Teleconference
> --
> Attendees:
> Daniel Dardailler, W3C, Co Chair
> Dimitris Dimitriadis, DOM WG, DOM test suite
> Karl DuBost, W3C, Co Chair
> Kirill Gavrylyuk, Microsoft
> Dominique Hazael-Massieux, WebMaster, W3C,
> Lofton Henderson, CoChair
> Rob Lanphier, Real Networks,
> Lynne Rosenthal, NIST, CoChair
> Selim Aissi, Intel,
> Olivier Thereaux, W3C,
> Peter Fawsett, Real Networks
>
> Regrets:
> Katie Haritos-Shea, W3C
> Mark Skall, NIST
>
> Absent:
> Andrew Thackrah
> Max Froumentin, W3C
> Carbo Oriol, LTG
> Gerald Oskoboiny, W3C
>
> Minutes:
>
> Lofton:
> Review agenda as posted. Rearranged the order as following.
> ** Framework documents
>      - endorse direction and partitioning
>      - content comments & suggestions
>      - plan for FPWD of Introduction.
>      - plan for FPWD of Process & Operational Guidelines
> ** Organization of WG life: mail lists, next telecon.
> ** Lynne Rosenthal's "Conformance Requirements" doc
> ** Issues tracking
> **Web site
> ** Review of Action items lists (see Brussels minutes).
>
> Lofton: Any additions?
> Dimitris: Suggested everybody to present themselves.
> All: presented themselves.
>
> ** Framework documents
> Lofton: Gave short overview of future set of Frameworks document.
> Timeline:
> Introduction is due to mid December,
> Operational and Process guidelines by mid Jan,
>
> Lynne: Could you elaborate on the difference between operational 
> guidelines and process guidelines?
> Lofton: Process guidelines are set of guidelines that ties test and 
> spec material production and the Charter with W3C Process.
> Operational guidelines are set of guidelines that that helps to set up 
> operations in QA Activity within WG;
> KD: So the process is more high level and operational is more detailed.
>
> Lofton: Question: Does the structure and the document split seem 
> reasonable?
> Did the move of the Process guidelines from Introduction make sense?
> Lynne: Structure seems to be reasonable.
> Everybody:agreed.
> Dimitries: Would like to participate in editing of operational and 
> process guidelines.
> Kirill, Lofton: welcomed.
> Action item: Kirill, Lofton and Dimiotris to discuss the work load 
> offline.
>
> Lofton: Question:Is it reasonable to push the 1st document in mid 
> December and 2dn and January.
> Everybody: agreed to release Introduction and Operational & Process 
> guidelines together.
> Action item: for Lofton, Kirill and Dimitris to define timeline.
>
> Lofton: gave quick overview of the "Introduction" document
> Kirill: quick summmary of the "Operational and Process" document.
> Action item: everybody to review posted 2 documents for structure, 
> depth of content, target and focus,
> especially Chapter4 in Introduction, Chapter 2, Section 2.4 and 2.5.
>
>
> ** Organization of WG life: Web site, mail lists, next telecon.
>
> Lofton: Documents development/discussion - we need to agree how to 
> organize this.
> Issue: we have very little time on teleconf. We should deal with 
> technical issues on the mail list.
> Lofton: We have 2 lists, we were conducting everything in public so 
> far. How do we proceed with these 2 lists further?
>
> All: Discussion on what to do with 2 mailing lists www-qa and 
> www-qa-wg, what questions to discuss on which mailing list.
>
> Concluded and agreed that we will:
>
> ** use www-qa-wg for interim-draft discussions, issue discussions,
> developmental discussions, etc.
> ** www-qa-wg  will be mail-able only by the 15 or so people on the list
> (basically, Brussels attendees plus subsequent telcon joiners).
> ** www-qa-wg archive will remain open to public.
>
[dd] We also noted that issues brought up on the public list (www-qa) 
should be closely monitored and reported to the WG, presumbaly by the 
chair or co-chair.

> Teleconferences schedule. Concluded and agreed that one 1-hour telcon 
> per month was
> not enough.  To generate and keep momentum, we need more frequent and
> longer.  Therefore:
>
> - next telcon will be in two week (2001-12-20),
> - it will be 1-1/2 hours.
> - the following one is still 2002-01-03 (and 1-1/2 hours).
> - it will be 2 hours earlier -- 2pm EST -- to make easier European 
> participation.
> - evaluate, after holidays, whether more frequent than 2 weeks is 
> needed.
>
> Action item:  KD or DD to get bridge for 12/20, 2pm - 3:30pm
>
> Between telcons.  All detailed work on active technical topics and issue
> will be done by email (www-qa-wg), as we don't have (even at 2-week
> intervals) sufficient time to deal with many in detail.
>
>
> ** Lynne Rosenthal's "Conformance Requirements" doc
> Lynne: Introduced the Conform Require document that she submitted 
> earlier in the week.
> The document should be viewed as input to the Spec Framework.  It 
> focuses on the conformance
> statements part of a specification.  The document which was originally 
> developed in OASIS's Conformance TC,
> and currently contains both an OASIS and W3C flavor.  Request that the 
> document be
> reviewed and comments welcomed. Better examples are needed and if 
> people could indicate whether the examples
> should only be W3C related examples.
>
> ** Issues tracking
>
> Three options were identified.  Two from the "Temporary
> Issues List" on the ../QA/WG page.  Dimitris mentioned an issue tracker
> (web service?) from Source Forge, that DOM uses.
>
> Action item: Dimitris to send pointer.
>
[dd] (to avoid inlcuding it in issues list for next telcon)
> Action item: All, email discussion and resolution of Issues-tracking 
> issue, asap.
>
> **Web site.
> Karl discussed beginning to form a policy for re-structuring the
> Web site, and on what pages to put various contents.
>
> Action.  Dom, KD, OT to work out and present a proposal for Web site 
> re-org.
>
> ** Review of Action items lists (see Brussels minutes).
> LH.  Declared that all Agenda issues have been
> addressed.  [LH-correction.  We didn't go through the Brussels Action 
> Items
> list for AI statuses.]
>
>
> Summary of New and old Action Items for next meeting:
>
> A-2001-12-06-1: Kirill, Lofton and Dimiotris to discuss the work load 
> offline.
> A-2001-12-06-2: for Lofton, Kirill and Dimitris to define timeline.
> A-2001-12-06-3: everybody to review posted 2 documents for structure, 
> depth of content, target and focus,
> especially Chapter4 in Introduction, Chapter 2, Section 2.4 and 2.5.
> A-2001-12-06-4: Karl or Daniel to get bridge for teleconf 12/20, 2pm - 
> 3:30pm
> A-2001-12-06-5: Dimitris to send pointer to source-forge issues 
> tracking system. Resolved.
> A-2001-12-06-6: All, email discussion and resolution of Issues-tracking 
> issue, asap.
> A-2001-12-06-7: Dominique, Karl, Olivier to work out and present a 
> proposal for Web site re-org.
>
> Next teleconferences dates
>
> - 2001-12-20 ,2pm - 3:30pm EST;
> - 2002-01-03 ,2pm - 3:30pm EST;
>
>
> Meeting adjourned at 5:30pm EST.
>
>
>


---
Dimitris Dimitriadis
dimitris@ontologicon.com
http://www.ontologicon.com
Received on Friday, 7 December 2001 19:35:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:08 GMT