W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: [Draft] Minutes from QA WG Teleconf 2003/03/31

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 19:25:03 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030408192109.00b13370@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, "Kirill Gavrylyuk" <kirillg@microsoft.com>, <www-qa-wg@w3.org>

Yes, apply it to #13.
I believe we close the issue, with a commitment to AAA conformance (and 
hopefully we can achieve this).  Mark has done his Spec review of the 
SpecGL to provide us with what we still need to do to meet AAA 
conformance.  We should use that to modify the SpecGL appropriately.

lynne

At 04:22 PM 4/8/2003 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>A correction and 2 questions...
>
>Refs:
>http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/lc-issues#x13
>http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/lc-issues#x14
>
>If you look at these two issues, I think that we were talking about LC-13, 
>not LC-14.  Unless someone disagrees, I am going to apply this to LC-13 
>(and final minutes should reflect correction).
>
>Question.  When can we close this issue?  Options:
>
>1.) when we achieve AAA conformance;
>2.) now, with the stated Resolution that we will "{ target | commit } for 
>AAA conformance".
>
>2nd Question.  We say "target" below.  That is wooly.  Do we target, or do 
>we commit?
>
>-Lofton.
>
>At 09:41 PM 4/2/03 -0800, Kirill Gavrylyuk wrote:
>>[...]
>>DH: Next LC14. Degree of conformance of SpecGL itself. Reviewer claims we 
>>are not AAA, simply because we do not provide the list of test 
>>assertions. 2nd issue - whether we should be AAA compliant.
>>PC: Would checkpoints list be a list of test assertions?
>>DH: May not be.
>>PC: Would be nice if we could tag TA within the document.
>>LR: I agree with it.
>>MS: It's not necessarily possible to markup all of the test assertions.
>>LR: I don't believe we can automatically generate TAs from the SpecGL.
>>KG: May be we should postpone resolution of this issue until we revisit 
>>the definition of a TA? We had slightly different opinions.
>>PC: I have a problem with interpreting assertions rather then marking 
>>them up.
>>MS: Volunteered to produce a TA list for the SpecGL.
>>DH: Agreed that we are going to produce such a list. Should we target AAA 
>>level of conformance? Should we first assess the level of conformance?
>>LH: Certainly would like to assess.
>>LR: Should we target AAA? How can we ask others to comply with AAA if we 
>>can't?
>>LH: I think we agree that we should assess the level we are currently at.
>>Action Item for MS to assess the current level of SpecGL conformance. 2 
>>weeks.
>>Agreed to target AAA by CR.
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2003 19:26:27 GMT

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