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

Week In QA

From: Jack Morrison <Jack.Morrison@Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 18:03:37 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200207152203.g6FM3bn19093@josie.East.Sun.COM>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Team
 In going thru the mailing for the last month to genearte WeekInQA, I ran into  
a couple of questions about what should be in versus out. We discussed this a 
little, but I want to make sure I am clear on the level of detail we are looking 
for. In the IG list there was not really anything discussed, except maybe 
Fashion Handbags and Hair accessories. That's easy. There is a lot on the WG 
list, but it falls into 4 catagories:
 
 1) logistics 
 2) reports on status (like closing an AI)
 3) individual comments (where there is only 1 item in the thread/subject)
 4) discussions about various things (>1 mail item)
 
My question is, what should be included ? #1 we agreed is not. #4 is (at least 
to me) obviously in. What about #2 & #3 ? If WeekInQA is for summarizing 
"discussion", then 2 & 3 don't seem to fit, at least to me. Discussion usually 
means more than one person.

As an example, if I JUST include #4, the first two weeks of July only have 3 
"discussions":

(Proposal) Questonnaire to WG chairs on Specification Authoring 
Updated Test Guidelines draft - 0701 
Proposed split of Testing Checkpoint 4.6 

If I include #3, it probably adds:

Process Document and Guidelines - Ongoing 
Encouraging a double review
New SpecGuide discussion draft 
Suggested Changes to Testing Guidelines
Testing Guidelines plan
New checkpoints 15.1 & 15.2 for Spec guideline documents

If I add #2 there are probably another 5-6 more, but it is unclear to me how 
important they would be to someone on the IG.

My sense is, that if we are trying to keep the IG informed then maybe #3 with a 
pointer to the thread and #4 with a summary and a pointer to the head of the 
thread would be best.

?????

This kind of brought another question to mind. If we decide that all the stuff 
in 2 & 3 is important to the IG, could we use www-qa for discussion and 
www-qa-wg just for logistics & status ? JAT (just a thought)

Jack
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 18:03:39 GMT

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