W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Proposal on forming of W3C Test Group (action item A-2002-03-1-3)

From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 11:30:24 +0200
Message-Id: <200204080930.g389UOm31291@zidane.inria.fr>
To: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Like Kyrill, I'd also favor integration in the QA WG, either as a task 
force or as part of our regular work.

I understand your points about this group doing different things, more
TS dev and technique oriented, but I think it's OK to have a WG doing
different things, all related: the WAI Web Content Guidelines WG, for
instance, didn't create a new group to work on their techniques, etc,
and on the other hand, there's a cost in creating a WG at W3C, with
resources identified: staff contact, chair training, director's
approval, charter, reports at AC meeting, etc. and those resources are
getting really scarced nowadays.

So I'd favor first: see how much of what you're proposing fit into the
existing QA WG framework deliverables, and if it doesn't. create a
task force within the QA WG to specifically work on that.

> QA WG,
> Below please find my outline of a proposal for forming a dedicated Test 
> Group within or in parallel to the QA activity. For simplicity's sake I 
> write in in email form, after receiving comments I will circulate a more 
> usual html draft.
> Forming a QA Test Group
> Rationale: Simplify production of Test Suites (with the required minial 
> set of quality requirements), enhance coordination between WGs and allow 
> for easier asserting of cross-specification functionality. Also to 
> increase the practice of the guidelines produced by the QA WG.
> Introduction: Most of the QA-related test activities that have been 
> produced up until this date in connection to W3C specs have either been 
> inernally produced within the particular specification's WG, or 
> incorporated in coordination with external parties. This has lead to 
> quality testing frameworks on the one hand, but in some cases very 
> different and incosistent, on the other.
> Proposal: According to the work that this WG produces, the W3C and its 
> WGs shouls produce test suites that are checked against the same 
> guidelines and checkpoints. This implies that they should share some 
> basic functionality and design. In order to achieve this and ease the 
> burden on the WGs that are to produce the Test Suites, I propose that 
> the W3C form a special Test Group which has the characteristics below:
> 1. Have full and normative knowledge of the various QA-related 
> frameworks within the W3C, especially with regard to tests and 
> conformance issues (as opposed to specification authoring, for example)
> 2. Help WG representatives to produce Test Material (mentioned, but not 
> formalized so far in the QA WG work)
> 3. Aid in producing Test Materials to be used for testing 
> interdependencies between implementations of specifications
> 4. Help in producing specification authoring tools that allow easier 
> generation of test materials (particulalry important given the current 
> idea of enhancing granularity of schemas used to write W3C 
> specifications)
> Organization: The Test Group should ideally be another (technically 
> oriented) WG within the QA activity. The reason it shoudl be a WG is 
> that it needs a chair, for coordination, W3C staff allocated in order to 
> make sure the technical architecture is there, as well as W3C member 
> organizations and/or invited experts.
> Also, it is important that there is a group that can take over after the 
> current QA WG finishes the more process-oriented work. It is certain 
> that there will be many issues witht the testing frameworks that will be 
> produced, and even more certain that various issues will arise in 
> connection with conformance claims that will be made by various 
> implementors.
> Concluding, I not that one was of viewing this group's work (but not 
> exhaustive) is as the more techically oriented parts of the current QA 
> WG documents: making what we say there actually happen.
> I look forward to the WG's comments.
> Kind regards,
> /Dimitris
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 05:30:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:26 UTC