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

Re: QAH topic to email discussion

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:54:29 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, www-qa-wg@w3.org

This checklist of criteria is also something that CSS provides in their 
guidance to test authors.


At 04:15 PM 4/26/2004 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>QAWG --
>At today's telecon, we decided to move further discussion of this to 
>email.  We were working on the first Good Practice of "Acquire",
>We decided that details were to be in TestGL turf.  I cut this text out,
>>[Issue: Is there possibility here for a "TM Quality Assessment 
>>Checklist/Template", such as: "correctness, traceability, atomicity, user 
>>documentation, maintainer documentation, declaration of scope, 
>>completeness (vis a' vis declared scope), harnesses or interfaces for 
>>application of the TM, reconfigurability, results assessment, results 
>>recording & reporting, automation features, versioning/errata support, 
>>declaration of publication licenses, integrated submission procedures, 
>>etc." (Issue cont'd): or, would this trample too much on TestLite turf? 
>>Further possible material is in old OpsET for CP5.5]
>I left in QAH a for-example list of the things that an assessment process 
>might cover, and conclude with "QA Framework: Test Guidelines deals with 
>this topic in much more detail, including (planned) templates and 
>assessment aids."
>So ... over to email discussion.
>(And AI to Patrick -- put a placeholder in TestGL draft so that this isn't 
Received on Monday, 26 April 2004 18:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:32 UTC