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

QAF test materials -- background

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:14:01 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org


In case you've forgotten, here is some background and motivation for the 
2/18 telecon topic (test materials for QAF GL documents)...

At 02:13 PM 12/12/03 -0700, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>Our review skeletons could be considered something of a rudimentary test 
>material.  It's what we use ourselves to do reviews.  But it doesn't break 
>down per conformance requirement (or per TA), only per checkpoint.  The 
>individual requirements in ConfReqs are the testable statements.
>Also, like our checklists, it is more of a Test Results Reporting 
>mechanism than a testing mechanism.
>[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2003/11/qaframe-ops-20030922-skeleton
>[2] http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2003/11/qaframe-spec-20031110-skeleton
>At 12:57 PM 12/12/03 -0700, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>>[...] JC has cleverly spotted the hole in our act.  As we discussed at 
>>Heraklion (and after), we have no test materials and apparently are not 
>>building them.
>>Are you going to (continue to) deal with him?
>>So ... what's our answer?  Something like, "We're working on it."?  Or 
>>"we're exempt" (and drop the AAA pledge from Charter)?  Or ...?
>>I should point out that I put sufficient formatting into the ConfReqs 
>>sections of (CR) OpsGL that I could generate a questionnaire (with 
>>per-confReq questions) via XSLT.  Adding brief instructions, we would 
>>have a test material for OpsGL.
>>>X-Original-To: www-qa@frink.w3.org
>>>Delivered-To: www-qa@frink.w3.org
>>>Delivered-To: www-qa@w3.org
>>>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:19:33 +0000
>>>From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
>>>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-GB; rv: 
>>>Gecko/20020508 Netscape6/6.2.3
>>>X-Accept-Language: en-gb
>>>To: www-qa@w3.org
>>>X-HPL-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the helpdesk for more 
>>>X-HPL-MailScanner: Found to be clean
>>>Subject: QA Op Guidelines test material
>>>X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/3FD9EA95.3080100@hplb.hpl.hp.com
>>>Resent-From: www-qa@w3.org
>>>X-Mailing-List: <www-qa@w3.org> archive/latest/1338
>>>X-Loop: www-qa@w3.org
>>>Sender: www-qa-request@w3.org
>>>Resent-Sender: www-qa-request@w3.org
>>>List-Id: <www-qa.w3.org>
>>>List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
>>>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:www-qa-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>Resent-Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:20:19 -0500 (EST)
>>>X-RCPT-TO: <lofton@rockynet.com>
>>>X-SpamCatcher-Score: 1
>>>X-SpamCatcher-1: e31209c1b6dc5bf79fdf3733b96c6439
>>>I am looking at the QA Op Guidelines CR on behalf of webont
>>>I note that in the charter of the QA WG there is a commitment to the AAA
>>>conformance, and noting guideline 3,
>>>the Working Group MUST publish QA deliverables, including at least the test
>>>materials to which the WG has committed, concurrently with each Working
>>>Group specification publication milestone.
>>>and the charter description of deliverables including
>>>Test materials in the form of questionnaires and/or interactive forms that
>>>lead the tester through the guidelines document, asking about each
>>>conformance requirement.
>>>I was hoping to find the questionnaire(s) associated with the QA docs in
>>>Candidate Rec, and an example of how to complete them (for example by the
>>>QA group, vis-a-vis the QA Ops guidelines).
>>>Any pointers?
Received on Tuesday, 17 February 2004 11:11:07 UTC

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