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

DRAFT: Minutes QAWG telecon Monday 25 August

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:29:21 -0400
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <483BFB38-D719-11D7-BAA4-0003934BEBF0@w3.org>

Minutes: Draft at
	http://www.w3.org/QA/2003/08/25-minutes-telcon.txt

QA Working Group Teleconference
Monday, 25-August-2003
--
Scribe: (KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, WG co-chair)

Attendees:
(PC) Patrick Curran (Sun Microsystems)
(KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, WG co-chair)
(DH) Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (W3C)
(LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO - WG co-chair)
(OT) Olivier Théreaux (W3C - IG co-chair)
(MS) Mark Skall (NIST)
(DM) David Marston
(VV) Vanitha Venkatraman (Sun Microsystems)

Regrets:
(AT) Andrew Thackrah (Open Group)
(LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST - IG co-chair)
(SM) Sandra Martinez (NIST)
(dd) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon)
(KG) Kirill Gavrylyuk (Microsoft)

Absent:
(PF) Peter Fawcett (RealNetworks)


Summary of New Action Items:
AI-20030825-01   LH    Contact Kirill for New microsoft member in the  
WG    ???
AI-20030825-02   OT    Ask for Bridge for a telconf for Wednesday     
20030826
AI-20030825-03   PC    Present the issues of TestGL for a broader use    
  20030901

Agenda:
1.) roll call 11am EDT, membership

2.) Any routine business
          - XHTML Print Last Call Review (7-sep) [0]
          - Monday 1st Sept (U.S. holiday) cancelled.
          [- overdue Action Items ]

3.) Status of OpsGL transition to CR
          - Letter requesting CR

4.) Any SpecGL topics
          - Schedule/deadline for final SpecGL text
          - new p-m-l diagrams [1]

5.) TestGL topics
          - Proposed topics [2]
          - J.Carroll issues thread [3]
          - Ref.  New TestGL text [6a]
          - Ref.  Annotated Crete TestGL minutes [6b]
          - Ref.  TestGL issues list [6c]

6.) Adjourn

7.) Overflow (12-12:30): available.

Previous Telcon Minutes:  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/0073


Minutes:

1.) roll call 11am EDT, membership
	done
	
2.) Any routine business
          - XHTML Print Last Call Review (7-sep) [0]
			done last week. -> KD
          - Monday 1st Sept (U.S. holiday) cancelled.
          [- overdue Action Items ]

KD: Should we called Microsoft AC Rep and Sun AC Rep for WG  
participation?
LH: I take the action Item to ask to Kirill a new contact.
AI-20030825-01   LH    Contact Kirill for New microsoft member in the  
WG    ???

LH: Holiday Monday next week. What to do?
OT: Move it on Wednesday.
AI-20030825-02   OT    Ask for Bridge for a telconf for Wednesday     
20030826


3.) Status of OpsGL transition to CR
          - Letter requesting CR

LH: About the draft letter for the call. Are we fine? We should send it  
today.
KD: Fine with that. I just need the document with issues and answers.


4.) Any SpecGL topics
          - Schedule/deadline for final SpecGL text
          - new p-m-l diagrams [1]

LH: We have done a good job on Spec GL. We have a good chance to have  
the disposition of comments document ready by next week. Mark has to  
produce a Test Assertions document.
MS: It's a huge task
LH: yes
DM: ??? talking about DOV
DH: Yes DOV are now on 2.2.6


5.) TestGL topics
          - Proposed topics [2]
          - J.Carroll issues thread [3]
          - Ref.  New TestGL text [6a]
          - Ref.  Annotated Crete TestGL minutes [6b]
          - Ref.  TestGL issues list [6c]

LH: We move to listen Patrick for Test GL topics.
PC: Should we actively ask for People previous experiences in the W3C  
WG.
MS: We do not have so much time, but I'm not quite sure how we would be  
able to incorporate them in TestGL.
LH: We could have done more, but we have done more than what has been  
said by Jeremy. We proposed two times to the OWL WG to review our  
stuff, they refused.
We are talking about publishing a Last Call soon.
MS: We want at least have information from the test leaders verbally or  
written.
KD: We have a list, if we send mails to Test Leaders, we should have  
precise questions.
PC: I would prefer a teleconf to have precise answers.
LH: That's a good idea, PC. We have been talking about going to Last  
Call in november 2003.
PC: I would prefer to have people on a call and to ask them what do  
they think about our document and not wait only Last Call.
MS: The ideal situation would not be to restrict the discussion to the  
test leaders. But we take the chance to limit the completion of the  
document.
LH: We will miss resources to have an ideal method.
PC: Maybe we can do both. That our document is a way to approach the  
testing, but we would like to have another view.
LH: It would be good to have different point of views. Let's use the  
next WD as a platform for a pro-active discussion.


Test Driven Development
PC: Jeremy Caroll has raised the issue that our guidelines are  
waterfall model based, as the tests come after the spec. But maybe  
sometimes our GL are too oriented as Jeremy presented it. We don't say  
in  our charter  that we only do conformance testing. should we broaden  
the scope by addressing quality testing?
MS: We are encouraging people to do in a certain way.
DH: W3C WGs will be interested as much by interoperability testing and  
conformance testing.
KD: We should look at the Test GL and show that it's not incompatible  
with other methodologies, and if there's an incompatibilty we should  
address it.
DM: I don't think we should encourage XP for Spec Development.
LH: Issues drive for tests, but tests drive for issues as well. SVG has  
a new rule, when you propose a new syntax it has to come with the test  
case. The way the SVG TS has been used as an interoperability TS even  
if it has been designed as a conformance TS.
DH: We should not restrict ourselves to Conformance Materials, but  
there might be also interoperability tests. We should try as much as  
possible to stay very generic.
MS: Conformance is one of the thing that contribute to interoperability  
tests.
PC: There are some areas where XP will be beneficial.
LH: We could in the discussion and scope the different possibilities.
KD: We should do a TS to test Test Guidelines. Something like each CP  
we are writing to test them against different kind of development of  
test materials.
PC: I agree that we should not put barriers for other methodologies.
MS: We are trying to have a document which adresses Spec and  
Implementation.
LH: The end result is important, but there's more than one way to get  
there.
KD: PC, Could you make a list of comments that will show what are the  
issues.
PC: Yes there are a few issues, for example, in the text we could  
encourage a bit more early testing.

AI-20030825-03   PC    Present the issues of TestGL for a broader use    
  20030901

6.) Adjourn
	done

[0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2003JulSep/0020.html
[1]  
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/02/qaframe-spec-uun#profile-module-level
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/0071.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Jul/0004.html
[6a]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/att-0046/TestGL- 
guidelines.html
[6b] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/0047.html
[6c]  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2003Aug/att-0048/TestGL- 
issues.html
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 25 August 2003 12:47:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:14 GMT