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

Editors telcon summary

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 15:17:56 -0700
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20011219093451.03a52800@rockynet.com>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
QA Working Group --

This might be useful background material for the 12/20 telcon.  The 
Framework document editors (Dimitris Dimitriadis, Kirill Gavrylyuk, Lofton 
Henderson) have been discussing when and how to get to FPWD of the first 
two documents.  This culminated in a teleconference on Monday, a summary of 
which follows...

QA Framework Editors telcon
==========

Monday, 12/17/01, 12-1pm EST.
Participating:  Dimitris Dimitriadis (dd), Kirill Gavrylyuk (kg), Lofton 
Henderson (lh)

Background.  These three comprise the (de-facto) Framework document editors 
group.  Kg & lh have been working on the first two documents, and dd 
offered to contribute at the 6 December telcon.

Purpose.  The purpose of the present telcon is to agree amongst the editors 
on a realistic schedule and way forward for the FPWD (First Public Working 
Draft) of the "Introduction" and "Process & Operational Guidelines" documents.

Status.  There has been little change to the initial discussion drafts (see 
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG) since the 6 Dec telcon, due to other commitments 
of both kg and lh.  However an internal email dialog has begun to clarify 
and refine the definition of the proposed partitioning of the Framework 
document family.

Issue Tracking.  This will be a principal topic at the next WG telcon, 
12/20/01.  Dd has circulated a pointer to Source Forge (SF, which DOM TS 
uses).  A sensitive issue is:  what happens if Source Forge 
disappears?  Key question is whether there is a way to capture the SF 
content in a format that is easily transformable to a successor 
format.  Action:  dd to investigate before 12/20 telcon.  Action.  kg to 
send pointers about how Schema WG and Protocols WG do issue tracking.

Framework documents partition.  Agreed that it is a good way forward -- it 
is the partitioning we want -- but at this stage it needs further 
definition and clarification.  The boundaries between some documents, as 
well as the proper content of the various documents, are fuzzy at this 
point.  This was the thrust of the past week's editors email 
dialog.  Action:  dd to produce and circulate a discussion draft for 12/20 
WG telcon, with further definition of the partitioning, plus 
examples.  Agreed:  This is on critical path to continuing to develop the 
documents towards FPWD.

Resource availability.  Kg has conflicts until after Christmas, then has 
some time available from 12/26 on.  Dd can spend perhaps half-time on the 
QA document for near future.  Lh can spend at least 3/4-time on QA for next 
several weeks.

Schedule.  Accordingly, we agree that this schedule is realistic for FPWD 
of first two parts ("Intro", and "Procs&Ops"):

1) new, substantially finished drafts for discussion at 3 January telcon;
2) FPWD within a week thereafter.

Issue.  How much circulation to "W3C Chairs" will be necessary for 
publication in TR space?  Does the designation, "Note" versus "Working 
Draft", affect this question?  Action item.  Lh to pursue answer.

Agreed:  Lh or dd may take over and do some editing on the "Procs&Ops 
Guidelines", until kg is available to resume work on it after 12/26.

### end ###



*******************
Lofton Henderson
1919 Fourteenth St., #604
Boulder, CO   80302

Phone:  303-449-8728
Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
*******************
Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2001 17:16:27 GMT

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