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

Re: Tuesday morning minutes

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:35:00 +0300
Message-Id: <951EF2C2-BF91-11D8-A512-000393556882@ontologicon.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
To: Mark Skall <skall@nist.gov>

Some comments inline:


On 16 Jun 2004, at 00:12, Mark Skall wrote:

> QA Working Group F2F Minutes
>  Monday, 15-June-2004
>  --
>  Scribe: Mark Skall
>
>  Attendees:
>  (PC) Patrick Curran (Sun Microsystems)
>  (KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, WG co-chair)
>  (DH) Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (W3C)
>  (LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO - WG co-chair)
>  (LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST - IG co-chair)
>  (MS) Mark Skall (NIST)
>
>  Regrets:
>
>  (DD) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon)
>  (AT) Andrew Thackrah (Open Group)
>  (VV) Vanitha Venkatraman (Sun Microsystems)
>
>  Absent:
>
>  Summary of New Action Items:
>
>  AI-20040615-1  For QA Handbook, each WG member will review a section 
> for clarity of content, typos, etc. (Intro and Roadmap  Lynne, Early 
> planning and commitment  Mark, Day to Day  Patrick, Licensing and 
> Branding  Dom, Acquiring Test Materials  Karl.)  by June 30.
>
>  AI-20040615-2  LH will make list of needed examples, put anchors in 
> and solicit examples from Chairs and IG, for QA Handbook by June 18.
>
>  AI-20040615-3 DH will put TestGL into Wiki by June 25.
>
>  Agenda:
>
>  Previous Telcon Minutes:
>
>  Minutes:
>  o       (9:00) Should QAWG continue as a WG (1 hr)
>
>
> Summary:  QAWG members looked at pros and cons of keeping the QAWG 
> together vs. discontinuing the group and working solely as an IG.  The 
> consensus is that the work would have much less clout if the WG went 
> away.  The group decided to continue the WG, at least through October, 
> and get documents to last call.  We will reduce the telcons from once 
> a week to once every two weeks.

>  LR  We should decide, as a Group, our future.  This was discussed at 
> the AC meeting.  People want us to stay but no mention of how to 
> support us.
>  KD  Perhaps we’re not perceived as useful to WGs.
>  MS  Disagree.  Vast majority of people support our work.
>  KD  Majority just want to know how to fulfill criteria that would 
> allow them to pass.
>  LR  What does W3M think?
>  DH  Although W3C is providing a lot of resources there is no pressure 
> to close.  However, members are not committing resources.  Co-chair 
> may not be continuing.  There has been a decrease in activity lately.
>  KD  Can we continue through the IG?
>  MS  We’re in a position of more strength if we continue as a WG.
>  LH  If we continued with IG we would not have to continue with some 
> processes.
>  MS  However, the perception would be that we’re not achieving 
> consensus.
>  MS  Are you recommending continuing as an IG rather than a WG?
>  LH  We need to either reduce scope or continue as an IG.
>  PC  I may have to reduce my effort or withdraw.
>  MS  Can we send invitation letters to people asking them to join?
>  KD  We’ve done that in the past without success.
>  LR  Perhaps we can target people to review drafts.
>  KD  We can show W3M how other people, outside of QA WG, have 
> participated.
>  PC  It would be very difficult to recruit people if we don’t have a 
> WG.
>  MS  W3C is very interested in quality, testing and precise recs.  It 
> would be a bad sign to discontinue.
>  LH  Has anyone discussed merging QA with other groups, like 
> accessibility?
>  DH  This won’t solve the problem.
>  PC  It would be a shame if WG went away.  There is value in having 
> such an organization.  However, we haven’t delivered anything that 
> would make their life easier.
>  MS  That shouldn’t be our goal.  We may not make other members’ life 
> easier.  However, the quality of specs, tests and implementations will 
> be improved, thus helping everybody.
>  DH  If we continue, how will we proceed without a co-chair?
>  LR  What takes the time?
>  LH  Issue processing and preparing for meetings.
>  MS  If we switched to every other week telcons, it would reduce 
> administrative effort.
>  KD  Reviews of documents take a lot of time as do editing of web 
> pages.
>  PC  What if we didn’t aim the documents at rec track?   Would that 
> significantly reduce the effort?
>  LR  It would but it would reduce impact.
>  DH  The plan is to continue WG through October.
>  LH  WG should allow documents to go through at least 2 more cycles.
>  DH  Should go through last call of QAH and SpecGL.
>  LR  If co-chair goes away, we need someone to do the issues list.
>  LR  Will help sort out issues.
>  LH  Who will be responsible that all replies are done and doesn’t 
> slip through the cracks?
>  KD  I will do this.
>
>
> o        (10:15) Status and future of QA Framework documents (1 hr)
>
>  §       what is the best way to proceed on all the QAF documents
>
>
>
>
>
>  Summary:  All three documents being processed by the QA WG were 
> discussed.  It was decided to continue the work on QA Handbook and 
> SpecGL and to discontinue the formal work on TestGL until the other 
> documents are complete.  However, the QAWG will informally continue 
> work on TestGL through the Wiki.
>
[dd] For the record, I'm not sure I agree (besides, I would have liked 
to dial in to participate in the discussion, but I had no number to 
call). We're still undermanned, though, comparing for example with 
SpecGL. In any case, one of the reasons we switched editorship within 
the TestGL group was to be able to drive the document better. TestGL is 
a very important document and if it doesn't get written in parallel and 
in pub track, it serves at best as an examples document. Lots of work 
that has been done in the W3C (DOM, SVG, etc) gets lost by not pursuing 
he document.

What does working on TestGL through Wiki mean more precisely?

>  LR  First let’s go over the status of the handbook and decide what to 
> do next.
>  LH  QAH is in pretty good shape, with a uniform level of maturity.  
> Examples are missing.  Templates need work  will get done.  Sections 
> 3.2 and 3.3 are related to TestGL.  I will continue to work on 
> document.
>  LR  We should all try to provide some examples.
>  LH  I will make a list of all the examples I need.
>  LR  Can we send that to IG and Chairs?
>  LH  Yes.
>  LR  Will this be a note?
>  DH  Yes.  A WG note.
>  LR  Everyone endorses this and wants to see this finished.
>  LR  Each of us should review a section for clarity of content, typos, 
> etc.
>  LR  Assignments: Intro and Roadmap  Lynne, Early planning and 
> commitment  Mark, Day to Day  Patrick, Licensing and Branding  Dom, 
> Acquiring Test Materials  Karl. 
>  LH  I will make list of needed examples, put anchors in and solicit 
> examples from Chairs and IG.
>  LR  SpecGL  lots of holes in document.  Kark has a procedure as to 
> how to proceed. 
>  KD  Document is enjoyable to read.
>  LR  TestGL.  What should we do with it?  Needs more attention.  
> Should we put it on the back burner?
>  PC  Unlikely to have time to work on it.  Perhaps we should delay 
> it.  However, there are references to TestGL in the other documents.
>  MS  This will allow more resources available later and better 
> documents to base TestGL on.
>  PC  Perhaps we can advance this in a less formal way (Wiki model).
>  MS  This would enable testing experts to be recruited.
>  LH  Wiki model will allow people with interest to work on this if 
> they have time.
>  Consensus: TestGL is off publication track for now.
>  DH  Will put TestGL into Wiki.

[dd] Could we set a date after which we decide whether to lift TestGL 
back into pub track?
>
> o       (11:15) Any IG topics, Team topics, etc.
>
>
>  KD  Validator going very well.  Had a meeting with company doing QA 
> in process for web services.  Trying to convince people to insert QA.  
> Very interested in outreach and would like to join W3C.  Month in QA 
> being continued by Lynne.
>
>  Adjourned for lunch at 1200.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Mark Skall
> Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division
> Information Technology Laboratory
> National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
> 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8970
> Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8970
>
>
> Voice: 301-975-3262
> Fax:   301-590-9174
> Email: skall@nist.gov
>  ****************************************************************
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2004 08:35:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:16 GMT