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

approved plan for DoV group

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 12:20:47 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

I'm updating lc-issues.  Here is what I think we agreed today (20030421 

This is the baseline proposal:


Still open details

1.) In baseline, I proposed a section 2.1 about the two types of guidelines 
(which Lynne pointed out was actually now in 1.5).  There was not unanimity 
about it.  Below I suggest that it be used to start the DoV 
section.  DISCUSSION?

2.) LC-95:  is Conformance Policy (GL3) a DoV?  (There is an active email 
thread on this.)

3.) Whether any of the rationale in the resolution of LC-66 is reflected in 
new Ch.2 text.


Add a new Chapter 2, "Concepts", which will look like this:

2. Concepts
2.1 Dimensions of variability (DoV)
[Open detail... Move these bits from 1.5 to the start of 2.1?

"The guidelines are of two general types:

     * those that deal solely with the document features and conventions of 
the specification — GL1 and GL10 - GL14;
     * those that, in addition to documentation aspects, deal with how 
specifications should establish and define the conformance policy for the 
specification's technology, including ways in which the technology may be 
subdivided for conformance purposes — GL2 - GL9."

[Agreed... Move current 1.8 to here,

[Ed note.  The DoV section, currently 1.8, neither contains nor references 
the definition of DoV, and perhaps ought to.]

2.2 Specification category and class of product
[We will put the fully fleshed-out and improved discussion of SP and CoP in 
here (per 20030418 telecon), in their own subsections, with anchors on the 
two lists. ]

2.3 Profiles, Modules, Levels
[20030421 -- seems to be consensus that such a subsection is inevitably 
needed.  Substantive issues discussion still tbd, 4/28 telecon]

2.X Other DoV subsections
[20030421 resolved:  no other individual-DoV subsections needed.  But we 
can change our mind later if need becomes apparent.]

2.Y Addressing relationships among DoV used
[Issue... There is confusion about "address the interrelationships...":

Agreed... Here we will discuss the concept in general, based on a 
generalized or generic version of:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Apr/0121.html .
This discussion will then be back-linked from each of the relevant CP, 
which will then only add its own specialization to the discussion.]

GL2 Identify what needs to conform and how.
[Abbreviated discussion  of SP and CoP here, heavy on links and references 
to 2.2.]

GL4/5/6 Profiles/modules/levels
[However the substantive issues resolve, move the detailed verbiage 
sections into "Concepts" (see above), and have abbreviated discussion in 
the GLs' verbiage, heavy on links and references.]

[Add a modified caveat back in.  In each DoV GL, have something like 
"Exercise caution. <BLAH> is one of the Dimensions of Variability. See 
@@sec 2.1 discussion@@ of risks versus potential benefits of using one or 
multiple DoV in a specification."]

CP2.4, 4.3, 5.2, 6.1, 7.3, 8.5, 9.7
[The "DoV relationship" CPs.  Their discussion/rationale will back-link to 
2.Y, and maybe add some specialized discussion.]

For reference, here is how the PLAN takes care of the issues in the DoV group.



This is solved by 2.Y above (and CP2.4, 4.3, 5.2, 6.1, 7.3, 8.5, 9.7).


This is not solved in the PLAN.  But email "0118.html" has gotten no 
negative comments and apparently stands.  [Detail to be determined -- some 
of its clarifying explanation could be put somewhere in new Ch.2.]


The 20030421 telecon agreed that the only potential place for consolidating 
DoV guidelines (within the set GL2-9) is the prof/mod/lev topic, which is 
yet to be discussed.  [The consolidation issue summarized:  can the 
prof/mod/lev concepts be consolidated? or if concepts are kept separate, at 
least can the 7 checkpoints (4+2+1) at least be put under a single GL?]


This is resolved by the GL2-9 ("Add a modified caveat back in...") 


At least partially solved by the PLAN.  The DoV are given prominence in 
Chapter 2, and would show up in the TOC.  Ch.2 would link to the individual 
DoV, and vice-versa.  The DoV GLs and the Document GLs are not segregated 
into separate chapters (which would be the ultimate restructuring).  QAWG 
consensus was not to go further on restructuring (not to segregate the DoV 
guidelines into a separate chapter.)


Solved by the PLAN.  The DoV are given prominence in Chapter 2, and will 
show up in the TOC.  Ch.2 would link to the individual DoV, and vice-versa.


NOT SOLVED YET.  If we agree that Conformance Policy is a DoV, then we need 
some verbiage, in GL3 or another subsection in Ch.2.  To be discussed, 3 
questions -- is it a DoV?  verbiage to answer originators question? if so, 
where to put it?


Resolved by 2.3, 2.4, and 2.Y.
### end ###

Received on Monday, 21 April 2003 14:18:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:30 UTC