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

history of CP3.2

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:34:20 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

I was supposed to check into the history of CP 3.2 (AI-20030107-4).  We 
were trying to figure out about the SHOULD clause.

I can't understand quite how it came about.  It appeared in in the editing 
cycle before the 20021108 publication, when I put a "To fulfill" clause 
into every checkpoint.  I think it is attempting to capture some subtlety 
in earlier text.  I'm not sure what that subtlety is, but it seems to be 
something like:  spec versioning/errata MUST be supported in test materials 
-- the most important end result of all of the QA deliverables -- and other 
QA deliverables such as planning documents ought to factor them in all 
along the way (SHOULD).

What I have done for the interim is reword the fulfillment criteria 

>Conformance requirements: the Working Group MUST ensure that the final 
>published test materials support specification versioning/errata, and 
>SHOULD address the topic of specification versioning/errata support in any 
>other QA deliverables such as intermediate planning documents.

That's the best I can do for now.  I think we will be taking another look 
at it in the Last Call review cycle.

Any objections to leaving it like that for now?

Received on Monday, 20 January 2003 15:32:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:29 UTC