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

Fwd: Comment on Fmwk:P&O, guideline 4

From: <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:15:23 -0500 (EST)
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <1014826523.3c7d061b714af@email.nist.gov>
I just realized that what I proposed for Guide 4 is basically Guide 6.  Sorry 
about that.  However, I still recommend that Guide 4 be modified - perhaps 
making it more specific to staffing.  

Perhaps - Guide:  Allocate staff for QA


----- Forwarded message from lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov -----
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:45:57 -0500 (EST)
From: lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov
Reply-To: lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov
Subject: Comment on Fmwk:P&O, guideline 4
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Suggestion for rewriting Guideline 4.

Rationale.  The current Guideline 4 introduces the notion of QA process, but
there is no discussion of what the QA process is.  The Checkpoints identify
only 1 aspect of what needs to be done - staffing. A QA process should include
much more regarding the functions and responsibilities, procedures,
communications, etc.  Since I don't see this covered elsewhere, I propose the
following for consideration.

Guideline 4.  Establish the QA Process
QA process describes the responsibilities and functions needed to enable the WG

to produce QA materials.  The process should ensure that the work is
accomplished in an open, consensus-based manner.  It should address the
procedural issues, communication channels, and structure and staffing.

Checkpoint 1:  develop a QA Process document [P1]
Checkpoint 2: Designate a QA subgroup or task force
Checkpoint 3: Appoint a QA moderator
Checkpoint 4. Provide communication mechanism(s)
Checkpoint 5. Allow contributions
Checkpoint 6. define criteria for reviewing and evaluating contributions
Checkpoint 7: define versioning of test materials


----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2002 11:15:30 UTC

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