W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2004

Re: QALites and relevant W3C documents

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 07:53:46 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040409074052.01e1f520@mailserver.nist.gov>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Hi Karl.

>Le 08 avr. 2004, ŗ 00:45, Lynne Rosenthal a ťcrit :
>>  1.  Pubsrules [2]:  Document versioning is tied to conformance, for 
>> example “if a technical report with no changes that affect conformance 
>> to a previous Rec, then the edition number is changed and no change to 
>> revision no”. . Last year, Susan Leach asked us about this.
>>  --relevant to SpecLite probably under Quality Control. We probably 
>> should mention something, but not go into details
>
>I'm not sure I understood the requirements or the question, would you mind 
>to give an example? Sorry.

I was just pointing out that PubsRules uses conformance (whether changes 
affect conformance) to determine if something is a new version or a new 
edition.  SpecLite doesn't address this and shouldn't.  However, since 
there is a relationship between new version/edition and conformance, 
perhaps SpecLite should mention somehing - possibly as an example - of 
what?  I'm not sure.  Maybe, an this is an example of how conformance is 
used to determine things other than an implementation conforms to a spec. 
or implements a function correctly.   So.  My question to the group - does 
this make sense?  Is it something we should mention in SpecLite?

>>  2. Tips for Getting to Rec Faster [3]. As part of its push to encourage 
>> technical quality, interoperability and consensus, it advocates, 
>> “develop test suites and other supporting materials in parallel with the 
>> Rec track document.  Talk to people in the QA Activity about existing 
>> tools and test suite frameworks.
>>  --supports TestLite
>
>===> TestLite provides you a lot of good guidance to get to Rec Faster.

Yep.  Just nice to see that testing and QA is showing up in other 
documents.  But we should be aware of what is being said in other documents.


>>  3. How to Organize a Rec Track Transition [4]. Test suites are 
>> addressed as part of the request for CR and beyond for implementation 
>> information.  “Are there test suites. What is the relation between test 
>> suite and conformance to the TR? Is QA situation generally clear and 
>> satisfactory? Do tests demonstrate/evaluate all features implemented? 
>> Links between the tests and features being tested? Are test suites 
>> planned? Coordination with QAWG?
>>  --relevant to TestLite
>
>I would say more QA Handbook, like it's likely to be the chair and the 
>staff contact who will request the Transition call. Though some of the 
>stuff could be used in SpecGL

Good point.

--Lynne
Received on Friday, 9 April 2004 07:54:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:15 GMT