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

Re: Changing owner of some AI

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 12:15:04 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20031031115935.03528a80@localhost>
To: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 06:18 PM 10/30/03 +0100, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux wrote:
>Hi Lofton, Karl,
>
>Some of our action items are owned by people that are no longer
>participating to the QA WG. Can you let me know what should be done with
>them, ie finding someone else to do it, or dropping the AI altogether:
>* AI-20021028-1: Peter, give Dom the text to be inserted in the
>definition section (Was : write up definitions of withdrawn and
>deprecated)
>[this is probably done, although I don't remember having seen a
>defintion for withdrawn]

The word is used once in GL4:  "Deprecation of a feature may warn 
implementers that the feature was a bad idea and it may be withdrawn in the 
future".  Does that warrant a definition?

>* AI-20021009-03 Kirill,  Add quality items to TestGL in the form of
>table, similar to OpsGL
>[this should probably be dropped, since we dropped the table in Ops]

Agree.

>* AI-20030218-2 KG, Send to PC a rough estimate of SOAP 1.2 spec +
>implementation development cost.

Probably ought to void/moot, since Kirill is gone.

>* AI-20011112-4 Kirill, Send serialized Infoset pointer

Ditto (unless David or someone wants to take it.)

>* AI-20030317-4 KG, Post LC comment on SpecGL to add to conformance
>disclaimer "if you fail a test"...

Ditto (unless someone thinks it ought to be done and wants to take it.)

>* AI-20030501-2 JR,  to send link to new grant wording.

Done.

>* AI-20030501-3 JR, to write a sentence on the "use" rights
>(details at http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/ActionItems)

Done.

-Lofton.
Received on Friday, 31 October 2003 14:15:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:14 GMT