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

Re: Outline of Boston presentation

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:21:57 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030220143159.03f6d260@rockynet.com>
To: Patrick Curran <Patrick.Curran@sun.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

I think that one of my outreach visits at Boston will turn out to be almost 
100% "In-reach", rather than mostly outreach with some feedback 
solicitation ("in-reach")

So I want to focus on this slide:

At 12:54 PM 2/17/2003 -0800, Patrick Curran wrote:
[...]
>* Feedback & Next Steps
>
>   What do you need from us?
>   What can we do to help?

Dimitris (1/18 minutes) suggested that we ought to also consider "Next 
Steps for the WG".  I think that the slides on "Spec Guidelines" and 
especially "Operations Guidelines" can take care of that (unless I 
misunderstand), especially with migrating Ops to near the end of the talk.

So for purposes of discussion, here is a proposed refinement of the 
Feedback slide, with some focus topics...

--- start slide---
* Feedback for QAWG & IG

What do you think of:

- QA Framework Last Call documents;
- Existing tools and resources (Library, Matrix, Comma-tool, ...)
- other?

Possible new services, tools, projects:

- Perform SpecGL reviews on request
- Consultation about SpecGL reviews
- Forms and tools to help implement OpsGL
- SpecGL validator (a ",SpecGL" tool)
- A dedicated Test Task Force working with WGs
- Data about existing test technologies and techniques [B1]
- On-demand consultancy to (WG) TM projects [B2]
- Tools & toolkits of general usefulness to (WG) TM work. [B4]
- ....???... [B3]
- other?
--- end slide ---

Notes about this:

a.) It is too long, obviously.  So... condense?  Split?  Both?
b.) We are re-chartering in 6 months.  That is the context of the second 
sub-set of stuff.  Which direction should we move?
c.) The list assumes infinite QA staff resources.  Obviously we can only do 
the highest priority stuff, or else grow the QAWG a lot.
d.) The numbers [B1] - [B4] are a representation of the 4 deliverables 
bullets in the draft TTF charter [1] (but I couldn't figure out what to do 
about the 3rd bullet).

Those bullets are:
    *  Provide information on existing Test Technologies and techniques 
used and developed by Working Groups in the W3C and other interested 
parties (information can be documents, tutorials, web sites and so forth)
     * Provide on-demand expertise to Working Groups seeking to produce 
such materials
     * Assure uniformity in Test Frameworks and Techniques produced, as 
explained in other QA WG documents (ensure that tools conforming to QA WG 
Test Guidelines documents are used and, where applicable, reused by as many 
WG as possible).
     * Develop tools and tool kits of general usefulness to help WGs 
develop test materials, resources allowing.

Comments anyone?  (esp. The Outreach Five)?

-Lofton.

[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/01/qawgttf-20030122.html
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 19:21:51 GMT

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