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

Re: Updated version of the test survey (AI-20040126-1 done)

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 07:09:58 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 10:01 AM 1/28/2004 +0100, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux wrote:
>Le mer 28/01/2004 ŗ 00:03, Lofton Henderson a ťcrit :
> > By when would we like them to reply?  (Proposal:  "by 27 February, if
> > possible")
>Added (FWIW, if we use WBS, we get to specify the date of end of review
>in a more prominent place, too).

I think we should use WBS.  Or at least give that option (w/ email 
instructions in case they don't want to use WBS for some reason.)

> > Is there any issue here about public/member-only information?
>There might be, indeed. If we don't use WBS, maybe I'll ask them to send
>their review to dom@w3.org, cc w3c-archive@w3.org?

Or if we *do* use WBS, could we have a prominent disclaimer at the top, "If 
your information is member-only, DO NOT use this form.  Instead, email to ..."

Alternatively, could we send the WBS results to QA Chairs?  Then we could 
use your XSLT to flatten the message to a file, and put that in WG (member 
only) Web space?  Or something like that.  Could WBS ask initially, 
"Results are assumed to be public, check here [] if your answers should be 
member only."

> > >4) Describe the information typically associated with a test case in
> > >your test suite (e.g. name, status, link to specification, ...)
> >
> > Do we want to know anything about how they express the information and/or
> > associated it with the test cases?  (I.e., a TCDL).  Or do you think this
> > is too detailed?
>I think this is too detailed, since it will be understood by too few
>people. I expect that if people have developed such a language, they are
>likely to point us to it at some point in their questionnaire.


> > >6) What parts of your test suite(s) are automated (if any)? Did you use
> > >existing tools to provide this automation or did you develop new ones?
> >
> > Do we want to ask about test results reporting, either as part of this
> > question or a separate question?  Or do you think this is too detailed?
>I think it would be useful, but I haven't found a way to formulate it in
>a way that I thought would be understandable by enough people; do you
>have a proposal?

I'll think about it and get back to you today.  Note that one of our 
deliverables at [1] is related, "SOA survey" of how people are doing test 
results reporting.  So this question would help us flush out people with 
whom we might want to talk more about it.


[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/#deliver
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2004 09:10:44 UTC

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