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

Re: Outline of Boston presentation

From: Patrick Curran <Patrick.Curran@sun.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:55:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3E529DD6.9010708@sun.com>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
CC: W3C QAWG <www-qa-wg@w3.org>

Thanks. I wondered about the "tools" statement myself - I took this from 
earlier presentations. It sounds as if we don't actually have any 
"software tools" today (templates are certainly very valuable, and are a 
"tool" in the broad sense, but probably don't qualify in most peoples' 
minds). Should we strike this reference for now?

When we've had a chance to catch our breath, I'd like to talk to the 
group about tools, and about some of the work we're doing at Sun. In 
particular, we're planning to update a specification markup tool that I 
think would be of general interest. I hope (and believe) I'll be able to 
fund this, and to get permission to donate it. The other area where I 
see a great need is for a test-harness, and again I think we can help.

Of course, all of the tools we develop are Java-based :)

Karl Dubost wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
> wondeful work, Congrats!!!
> At 12:54 -0800 2003-02-17, Patrick Curran wrote:
>> * How the QA-WG can help
>>   We can't do your QA work for you
>>     We don't have the resources nor the domain-specific expertise
>>   We do provide guidance, tools, and processes
> Which tools? :) a list even for us will be good to establish and will 
> help us to identify what's needed by W3C and WGs
> 1. Templates.
> We have the ,new tool which is very practical to prototype documents 
> and could reduce tremendously the burden of an author or an editor. If 
> we design good templates, we can help people to focus on editing 
> content and not worry about markup.
> 2. Templates for spec. Again.
> There's already a template when you create a new WD, but imagine you 
> have a template that help an author to draft a feature for a spec.
> You have a form and you design:
>     Element name: [             ]
>     Description:  [                       ]
>                       [                       ]
>     Testable Assertion: [                 ]
>     Examples:     [                       ]
>                       [                       ]
>                       [                       ]
> And this markup could generate a kind of "QA standard" markup that an 
> editor could add in his Working Draft.
> 3. Issues Tracking -> Guide for http://www.w3.org/Bugs
> 4. Planning for organizing different calls and different stages of a 
> specification.
> Other simple things? Let's come with simple ideas, easily implementable.
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 2003 15:56:54 UTC

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