- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 17:06:36 -0500
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Dom, Lynne,
Just a proposed wording and solution, I don't know if it makes sense.
The QA Framework: Specification Guidelines Specification does not
comply itself to the Guideline 12. Publish an Implementation
Conformance Statement proforma.
* CP 12.1
I propose something done on the example of UAAG 1.0.
***************************
<p>On [Date], [Specification X] [Status] ([URI]) conforms to <acronym
title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</acronym>'s "<acronym
title="Quality Assurance">QA</acronym> Framework: Specification
Guidelines", http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-qaframe-spec-20021108/.
Conformance level: <a
href="QA-checklist.html">[Level-of-Conformance]</a>. </p>
* CP 12.2
And put it in the 3.2 Conformance definition of QA Framework:
Specification Guidelines
with modification of the wording of this section.
A specification conforms to this document by satisfying the following
requirements.
1. The specification has reached one of the three levels of
Conformance.
2. The claim of QA conformance is included in the status
section of the specification as defined in the sample conformance
claim.
3. The list of checkpoints covered by the specification
itself in a specific file QA-checklist.html
*************************
The 3rd item is to make clear that people didn't apply to a
checkpoint because it was not necessary.
--
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
http://www.w3.org/QA/
--- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2002 17:06:41 UTC