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

Re: ICS for Spec Guidelines

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 08:51:09 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, www-qa-wg@w3.org

I also am a bit confused.  We agreed that the SpecGL should have an ICS and 
I think that the Checklist with some additions could serve that 
purpose.  However, I think Karl's wording may fit in nicely for how to 
specify claims to the SpecGL.


At 06:38 PM 12/3/2002, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>I have one question about this...
>At 05:06 PM 12/3/02 -0500, Karl Dubost wrote:
>>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.
>Isn't the Spec-Checklist (which is linked from SpecGL),
>an ICS pro-forma for SpecGL?  The introduction says:
>"...intended to be convenient for organizers and evaluators of QA projects 
>in W3C Working Groups, to facilitate assessing specifications against the 
>checkpoints. The table includes spaces for scoring each checkpoint, "yes" 
>(satisfied), "no" (not satisfied), "n/a" (not applicable)."
>>* 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 
>>         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 Wednesday, 4 December 2002 08:58:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:29 UTC