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

Ops Guidelines Issue

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:59:53 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020415111909.0423dcd0@rockynet.com>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
QA Working Group --

I have come up with an issue about the Ops Guidelines [1].

Recently I have been looking at the QA aspects of SVG (while generating 
content for Ops-Extech), and have been looking at some existing activities 
that have published Recommendations (such as XML 1.0 and XSLT 1.0).

Issue:  Checkpoints don't clearly address existing groups.

Description:

In the introductory section 1.3, "Navigating..", we say:

"This document is applicable to all Working Groups, including those that 
are being rechartered or already exist. Working Groups may already be doing 
some of these activities and should review the document and in so far as 
possible incorporate principles and guidelines into their work"

The first couple of guidelines -- QA responsibility, QA commitment, 
resource allocation, etc -- are all written for new groups.  There is no 
mention of how an existing group should make its commitment, the TS 
responsibilities of a group that has published a Rec and has rechartered or 
is rechartering.  For example:

** in-progress towards Recommendation, but already chartered (e.g., XFORMS)?

** done w/ a first Recommendation, but moving on to further work (e.g., 
SVG, XSLT, XML)?

Imagine being a member of one of these groups and looking at the first 
couple of Guidelines/Checkpoints.  What would you conclude about what you 
should do?  I don't have a proposal yet, but one or more of the following 
options might be appropriate:

a.) reword the guidelines and checkpoints, or add new ones (i.e., there 
would be "applicability" here -- some ckpts apply to new groups and some to 
old groups).
b.) add prose addressing "old groups"
c.) add new/old criteria to Ops-Extech for pass/fail ("verdict criteria")

I think this is important enough that we should take a little time, so I'll 
log it as an issue, unless anyone objects.  (Btw, I'll have new, 
substantially revised issues list out today.)

-Lofton.

[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2002/framework-20020405/qaframe-ops
Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 13:59:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:09 GMT