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

my AI-2002-10-16-1 (& AI-20021008-06)

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:17:34 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Karl has agreed to be owner of AI-20021008-06 (see [1]), Dimitris 
assisting.  Thanks Karl!

I have a related action item,  AI-2002-10-16-1 (which this email closes),

         AI-2002-10-16-1 lofton start email discussion about possible 
presentation material for outreach to other groups.

So here goes, here are some thoughts...

For Karl's item, I think that there are two related parts that we need to 
think about:

1.) a briefing package (slide show) for approaching the WGs
2.) a strategy, plan of action, and schedule for how to interact with the WGs

#1 is where my item -- "start email dialog" -- applies.

I think that #1 should probably be about 15 minutes, so that we can present 
it in a WG teleconference, or to a WG at TechPlen week, or ...  Do you 
think 15 minutes is a good target, or is it too short?  (20?  30?)

Before we can decide what should be included in #1 and how we should do #2, 
we need to understand:

         -- what do we want from the WGs;
         -- and, what do we want to tell them?

Some possibilities:

** reference the Framework and other QA resources
- esp. Matrix, Notes, etc
- future possible TTF (feedback?)
** why should they want to use Framework?
- this need NOT increase their total work
- should REDUCE their work, if done from beginning
- more business case? (DD?)
- success case studies/testimonials (SVG, SOAP, DOM, CSS, ...)
(- lotsa benefit from simply trying to apply a GL document )
** about Framework becoming mandatory some day
- why should it be mandatory (justification)?
** what we need/want from WGs
- they look at Framework (SpecGL, OpsGL)
- start to apply key ideas now
- give us feedback on Framework
- more feedback:  what do WGs want/need from us?
** we need from WG's member companies
- a few good QAWG participants
- (anything else?)
** a few easy "starter" actions from OpsGL
- appoint a QA moderator and task team
- decide and document QA commitments
- plan and synchronize deliverables
- set up communications and Web page
- call for participation (more people, for QA work)
** a few easy "starter" items from SpecGL
- be sure you have a conformance clause/section
- be sure that critical conformance information is easy to find
- make sure that the spec's scope is clear
- be clear about classes of product and conformance policy
- ...
(Hmmm... now that I look at it, I think 20 minutes might be minimal for a 

The idea behind the last two sections is:  "don't be overwhelmed by the 
25-30 checkpoints in each GL document -- here are a few easy things that 
you can start doing right now, that won't cost much time/effort".  I may 
have got the particular items wrong, but it seems like a good idea to 
suggest an easy, low-pain, introductory (pre-mandatory) experience with the 
GL documents.

Some part of what we want to tell them probably can come from previous 
informative presentations:

a.) subset of LH slides from Cannes and KD slides from Boston (AC 
mtg);  [2], [3]
b.) subset of slides from July Project Review w/ Team.  [4]

The rest will be new.

What do you think?


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2002Dec/0047.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/Talks/0227-TP-QA/Overview-4.html
[3] http://www.w3.org/2002/Talks/1120-ac-QA/
[4] http://www.w3.org/2002/Talks/0718-qa/
Received on Tuesday, 10 December 2002 19:16:20 UTC

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