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

PRs & GPs and numbering

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:56:07 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Today we settled on interim solution, all Principles (PR) will be renamed 
as Good Practices (GP).  TBD -- long term solution for better title for 
Principles.  (One thing I don't like with the simple re-titling of PR as GP 
is that it tends to introduce redundancy within the set of GPs, because PR 
is the umbrella or container of a few GPs.)

How about "Guideline" in place of "Principle"?  Recall that QAH was derived 
from OpsGL stuff by mapping GLs to PRs, and mapping CPs to GPs.  This 
preserved the organizing / collective role of GLs -- the new PRs are like 
the old "organizing Guidelines".  (If you don't like GL, suggest something 
you like better.)

Then the question comes up, why not also keep the title "Checkpoints"?  I 
think Good Practices is more user friendly -- I like it better.

So how about Guidelines and Good Practices?  (If you don

I also am supposed to suggest a numbering scheme.  I like something really 
simple like:  Guideline 1, Guideline 2, Guideline 3, Guideline 4 (there are 
4 Principles now).  Good Practice 1, Good Practice 2, ..., Good Practice 15 
(there are 15 GPs now).

The little title blocks on the boxes in QAH [1] could also have an 
accessability improvement.  Similar to how Story 3 is titled, "Story 
3:  Test suite transfer", we could have:

GL1:  "Guideline 1:  plan early"
GP1:  "Good Practice 1:  build or acquire."

Comments or suggestions?


[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2004/10/QA-handbook-ed
Received on Wednesday, 27 October 2004 17:56:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:33 UTC