Re: TestGL draft

At 12:59 AM 6/5/2004 +0300, Dimitris Dimitriadis wrote:

>WG,
>
>As promised during Wednesday's talk with Patrick, Lofton and Dom, I've 
>sent the document to Patrick for him to check.

 From the record of that talk,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jun/0006.html ,

[[
** publish before f2f -- Friday 11th June at latest;
** DD/PC send new draft to QAWG:  by Friday 4th June (A.M. Eastern time);
** QAWG review/discussion:  Monday, 14th June QAWG telecon.
]]

I.e., the finished draft was to be circulated to the QAWG by Friday morning 
(EDT).

Did I miss a message containing the draft?  (I.e., did it get anti-spammed 
here, like some incoming HTML messages do?)


>Please note that I have limited the work to the following:
>
>1. No proper layout since I want to gather all feedback and update the 
>document before publication, thought I'd do the layout at the same time 
>(this includes introductory/concluding sections)
>2. I've tried to incorporate as much as possible of the old operational 
>guidelines. Here I want to note that
>
>(i) I think TestGL should not consist of that many operational guidelines 
>(I realise there is a spillover from the old OpsGL, but I think they fit 
>better in QAH)

You should bring this up as an issue.  By my recollection, we (QAWG) 
actually decided on a specific set of items that were going into this section.

>(ii) I think QAH and TestGL editors need to commonly decide what gets put 
>in QAH. Maybe we can do this before the next publication cycle.

I thought we already did so.  (But don't have any minutes pointers handy 
right now.)

Other recollections?

-Lofton.