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

Re: LC Issue 109 Processing for Thursday

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 08:22:24 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030410081814.01e010f0@terminal.rockynet.com>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

This issue has some history -- 2-3 previous issues.  I have just updated 
the lc-issues (#109) to reference this history.

Most of the explanation in the GL1 -- including the definition/discussion 
of use case and user scenario -- have disappeared over time.  As GL1 and 
CPs 1.2, 1.3 now stand, it is completely unclear why we might have once 
thought that use case applied in one CP and usage scenario in 
another.  Furthermore, the rationales of the two seem to have merged.

Kirill, Andrew, and Lynne have significant past history in drafting the 
original CPs and/or working out the respective definitions.  Perhaps they 
can help shed some light on intentions that are not obvious from the text.

-Lofton.

At 02:28 PM 4/7/03 -0400, Lynne Rosenthal wrote:

>Hello All
>
>For Thursday, Please be prepared to discuss Issue 109 - Should we delete 
>CP 1.3 and if no, what is the rationale for keeping it.  (this issue may 
>not be published yet).  This will be the first topic of discussion on 
>Thrusday, 10 Apr.
>
>Discussion:  It is unclear as to the difference between CP 1.2 and CP 
>1.3.  Is CP 1.3 a superset of CP1.2? Do we need both?
>
>thanks
>Lynne
>
Received on Thursday, 10 April 2003 10:20:46 GMT

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