- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 16:51:43 -0700
- To: Patrick Curran <Patrick.Curran@sun.com>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Patrick et al, I have some suggestions about the OpsGL slide. While my suggestion doesn't change what it basically says, it does change the style somewhat. You may prefer the old style, but having edited on OpsGL so much (too much!), I think it's refreshing to see some different words for a change. By the way, this is in the context of our decision at Tuesday telecon, to move this slide to last (or near last), so that we can end with some immediately actionable "punch". Current ----- At 12:54 PM 2/17/03 -0800, Patrick Curran wrote: >[...] > >* Operations Guidelines (think QA) > > Appoint a QA lead > Integrate QA into Working Group activities > Define and allocate resources for QA activities > Synchronize QA activities with the specification milestones > Define the QA process > Plan for development, publication, maintenance of test materials Proposed revision ----- (see styling notes after outline). * Operations Guidelines (think QA) Appoint a QA lead INTEGRATE IT -- commit to QA goals and scenario. STAFF IT -- assess and assign appropriate staffing COORDINATE IT -- synchronize QA and specification deliverables PLAN IT -- the process for development, publication, maintenance MAKE IT EASY -- use OpsGL's @@charter template@@ and @@process template@@ About styling. I don't advocate upper-case. But some styling to emphasize the words that I have put in upper case. In the last slide, the "@@" bracketed phrases would link to those templates. As I said, this is really a matter of style. You could use the current words on the slide, and talk the latter words. Or use the proposed words on the slide and talk the current words (or some hybrid). My own preference is for the latter. Opinions? Also, I'm sure the words can be improved. This was a quick draft. More later (about feedback slide), -Lofton.
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2003 18:51:35 UTC