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

Re: CoP vs. Profile vs. ....

From: Andrew Thackrah <andrew@opengroup.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:02:15 +0000
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20040113190215.A14579@hyperion.opengroup.org>


Sounds like you have an abstract product class "Conforming SVG Viewer" and
two concrete subclasses "Static" and "Dynamic". '"High-Quality" looks like 
it is
a property of the (parent) class - so perhaps could be treated as a module 
module comes nearest in our list to specifiying a 'flavour' of a class (I 
think)

-ADT


On 2004.01.13 18:40 Lofton Henderson wrote:
> 
> David (& everyone) --
> 
> As input to its current f2f meeting, I'm trying to make a contribution 
> to SVG to help sort out (for SVG1.2) a messy situation involving lots of 
> DoV.  I have a question that I'd like your feedback on (by CoB today, if 
> possible).
> 
> SVG1.1 defines conformance for viewers [1], in some "sub-categories":
> 
> a.)  Conforming Static SVG Viewers
> b.)  Conforming Dynamic SVG Viewers
> c.)  Conforming High-Quality Static SVG Viewer
> d.)  Conforming High-Quality Dynamic SVG Viewer
> 
> So we have four kinds of viewers, generated by two orthogonal axes 

(static/dynamic, and low/high quality).
> 
> My initial thought was to designate these as 4 classes of product 
> (CoP).  The seem to fit SpecGL's generic definition of CoP at [2].  Then 
> I try to classify them according to our enumeration at [3].  Problem:  I 
> don't understand the brief abstract definitions at [3] well enough apply 
> them to a-d above.  (Recommendation:  we *really* need a lot of stuff in 
> SpecET, or else a Quick Tips linked from SpecET, that disambiguates and 
> helps people apply this concept.)
> 
> Can you suggest a classification of a-d according to [3]?  E.g., #a--3rd 
> bullet, #b--5th bullet, etc.
> 
> Although all 4 seemed to me to be CoP (at least the way they're treated 
> in the Conformance Clause [1]), it then occurred to me:  maybe #a & #c 
> are two profiles (or levels?) of the same CoP (SVG static viewer), and 
> #b & #d are two profiles of another CoP (SVG dynamic viewer).
> 
> Then it occurred to me:  maybe all #a, #b, #c, #d are 4 profiles of a 
> single CoP (SVG viewer).
> 
> There are lots of ways to parse it!  (And ... it is not a trivial task 
> to apply SpecGL/ET to a complex conformance problem!)
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -Lofton.
> 
> p.s.  I singled out David because he drafted a lot of the CoP stuff.  
> But I'd be happy to hear from anyone/everyone.
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/conform.html#ConformingSVGViewers
> [2] 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-qaframe-spec-20031110/definitions#definitions
> [3] 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-qaframe-spec-20031110/concepts#spec-cat-cop
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 14:04:07 GMT

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