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

(Proposal) Questonnaire to WG chairs on Specification Authoring (AI-2002-06-14-04)

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 18:16:32 +0300
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <306E7C47-902A-11D6-8260-000393556882@ontologicon.com>

[Introductive wording]

1. In authoring your specifications, do you use (1 choice) as format for 
_authoring_ (not publishing):
[] XML Spec or variety thereof
[] XHTML
[] HTML
[] (X)HTML + div using classes to identify particular content and 
structure

(Rationale: will give a clearer picture of what people use now.)

2. Are you using any grammar or other agreed on content structure? If 
so, please indicate which (does not apply if you use XML Spec)
[] Yes (please indicate)
[] No, but group has considered it
[] No

(Rationale: give a clue as to how many have looked into granular 
grammars and adopted it.)

3. How do you produce your published specifications?
[] Lead editor/WG chair assembles parts from the editors, producing a 
master document
[] Submit parts of document, producing the master document via script or 
similar solution
[] Other (please indicate)

(Rationale: gives goood indication as to how lead editors work when 
producing master documents)

4. How big a part of the editor's workload is it to stay close to a 
particular markup, if used?
[] Less than 5%
[] 5-10%
[] 10-20%
[] More than 20%

(Rationale: up to 10% of time invested spent on grammar issues would, I 
think, be acceptable. Anything over that is too much to ask people to 
invest time in.)

This concludes my action item AI-2002-06-14-04.

Comments are appreciated.

/Dimitris
Received on Friday, 5 July 2002 11:15:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:10 GMT