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

RE: DRAFT minutes, QA Working Group Teleconference 2003-02-24

From: Kirill Gavrylyuk <kirillg@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 13:09:52 -0800
Message-ID: <37DA476A2BC9F64C95379BF66BA2690206F493A4@red-msg-09.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Joseph Reagle" <reagle@w3.org>, <www-qa-wg@w3.org>, "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>

My intent was a clear separation of the W3C test cases from the rest of
the content it is compiled with. 

This is the case with the books having appendixes with W3C specs. I
assume that the W3C would not like a book with appendix that contains a
W3C spec with couple key paragraphs thrown away?:)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Reagle [mailto:reagle@w3.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 1:05 PM
> To: Kirill Gavrylyuk; www-qa-wg@w3.org; Lofton Henderson
> Subject: Re: DRAFT minutes, QA Working Group Teleconference 2003-02-24
> On Monday 24 February 2003 22:51, Kirill Gavrylyuk wrote:
> > 4a. Addition. Add company's own test cases - clearly separate the
> > test suite and company's test cases. You can add a W3C test
> > only as a whole, cannot exclude any of the test cases from it. (I
> > sure about that during the telconf, but convinced now)
> As I was adding these issues to my summary, I realized I neglected to
> address this point. The W3C does never tried to prohibit the
> of
> materials under the Document License. For instance, one can frequently
> find
> books about W3C Recommendations that include them in their appendices
> or
> are wholesale compilations. (Consequently, I don't think this is a
> case with respect to test cases.)
Received on Monday, 3 March 2003 16:10:33 UTC

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