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

Minutes F2F, Reading Friday AM

From: <lsr@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:31:50 -0400
Message-ID: <1099053110.418238364557f@webmail.nist.gov>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org


Minutes: QAWG Friday 29 October, AM
Scribe: Lynne

Issue Reading-009:  David's Marston answer to the TAG about versioning.  
http://www.w3.org/mid/OF2ABD879D.2DB02525-ON85256F38.004E0420@lotus.com
ACTION: Dom to review and recommend disposition


Issue Reading-012:  David Marston - Mandatory Modules in Vis
http://www.w3.org/mid/OF4C2464B1.C80438DA-
ON85256F23.000512685256F23.000912A9@lotus.com
ACTION: Dom to incorporate ideas regarding core modules into later version of 
ViS

Topic SpecGL Review Techniques and Examples
ACTION: Karl to do consistency check of terms, including ToC

1.1A: Techniques are all part of 1 technique.  
T. Use the template to create the conformance clause
Step - complete the template and put the result into the specification
Step: Create an item in the ToC
If your technology – put as a subitem in above Step

1.1B
Need much work to draft.  
Identify in the spec, what are the different parts that may vary (e.g., 
profile, module, level). Things that have an effect on conformance model
Perhaps start with a technique for handling the simple case
1.  – List the classes of products – what it is that would conform
2. – List the types of flavors of conformance
2. – List the different ways to subset the technology
4.– define the mapping between subsets and flavors of conformance
 4a draw a diagram to show the mapping – this will help to show the 
relationships and understand 
4b write it down
4c. bonus: include the diagram if it helps
need an example that shows all these steps
ACTION: Karl to redraft and draw the diagram for Ruby

1.1C
3 is too long, break into steps
4 Know what part of the spec is normative/informative.  Then Label the sections 
and/or put in the conformance clause the way you define the normativity.
5 more about how to specify conformance requirements.  Move to 3.2A

1.2A
1. Remove
Change 2nd item in 3, to unique identification of specification 
(name/version/date)
Product claiming conformance needs to be uniquely identified
Label or type of conformance being claimed
We should create template with the placeholders. 
Mention the ICS being part of the claim (if have ICS)
ACTION: Lynne to revise and create template.

1.2B
Explain what is meant by all features. 
Need to describe types of information that an ICS can have.
Provide how to create the ICS by using XSLT  or other technique to extract 
information
ACTION: Lofton and Dom to rewrite indicating both aspects – what goes into the 
ICS and how to automatically generate it from the markup

1.2C
1. Replace. 
2. refer to 1.2A, be sure that your conformance claim reference 1.2A references 
the completed template 1.2B.  Explain how the ICS is referenced. 

2.1A
no change

2.1B
Technique of the previous GP. 
Make new technique = write simple direct statements, and take these techniques 
as examples of what is meant. 
ACTION: Lynne to do the merge

2.1C
separate techniques.  Make bullets.
Combine 2,3,4,5 – Provide examples for: with 2,3,4,5 as subbullets.

Example 2 – remove 2nd paragraph. Revise 1st paragraph. 
ACTION: Karl

2.2A 
3 – describe them as part of the scope. 
Steps of 1 technique

Too many examples. Keep MathML, SMIL, Ruby

3.1A
1 not really technique, move to what does this mean.  
Add technique to use markup to define terms – helps to create glossary
ACTION: Karl 

3.1B
Need to be consistent in terms – forms, flavors, type of conformance, etc.
2 – expand to say, that the label is clearly confined.  Have a summary of the 
labels of conformance with the name and definition 
ACTION: Karl consistency check of terms

3.1C
remove editor notes.  Dom to modify link

3.1D
no actions

3.2A
2 is sub-bullet of 1
remove  <>
3 descriptive style – need a unique and uniform way to define the conformance 
requirements.  What ever way you choose, stick to it.  
ACTION: Karl to define a kind of stylistic template for the conformance 
requirements
 
3.2B
Change Explain to Indicate (designate)
Decided not to add negative technique:  Don’t rely on style to convey 
mandatory/optional. Avoid reliance on style formatting only – causes 
accessibility problems
2 – not clear.  Remove. This means group like requirements – e.g., group all 
the should requirements together, all the must requirements, etc., then put 
them into modules – that map to degrees of conformance.  

4.1A
no change

4.1B
adjust the bullets – make steps

4.1C
adjust the bullets – make steps

4.1D
2 pieces: define the rules, where do you put them. 
how do you write the rules in your document?  What does it mean to write the 
rules for profiles – where do they reside?  
ACTION: Lynne.  Also, send rules for profiles written for healthcare

4.2A
remove ‘real’ from heading
Techniques should help people determine if there is a real need.  
Make list of use cases with optional feature. Lack of consensus (agreement)  is 
not a reason for an optional feature.- capture in the why care.  Test the 
feature with the class of product – in this class of product it isn’t 
implemented or in this class of product it is required for conformance and not 
really optional.  
ACTION: Lynne to revise
ACTION: Karl to fix example wording

4.2B
Change title to indicate optional features. 
Add more techniques if we can think of them

ACITON: Karl Remove CSS2 example – may confuse people

4.2C
Remove GP and distribute into other GPs. 
ACTION: Karl

4.2D
Move above 4.2B

4.3A
explain what is meant by specification
In technique – Change extensions topic to extensibility.  Call it ‘extension’ 

4.3B
Technique is to create a template for extensions
Some of these are techniques not steps.  What should one do with these 
questions.  Change questions into direct techniques. 

Remove examples: mechanism defined as conformance rules – don’t think it adds 
anything to have this category. 

ACTION: Karl to rework
ACTION: Karl to review all techniques with questions

4.3C
ACTION: Lynne to rewrite section. 

4.3D
no change

4.4A
no change – (Dom has editorial)

4.4B
2 - degree of support 
Distinguish between producers and consumers.  
P = Define how deprecated feature is handled by each class of product.  
Technique -  typically we expect consumers (user agent) behave no differently, 
producers (author tool, complier) would issue error or flag. 
ACTION: Dom to rewrite

4.4C
2 – remove
1 – editorial.  Keep only 1st sentence
3 - remove
ACTION: Dom 

4.4E
no change

4.5A
1 – reword, identify failures and define error messages
2. – reword
3 – technique, not part of the above 2. 
ACTION: Dom

5.1A 
(good practice)
wording of what does this mean match why care
Rename the GP and revise entire item
Rewrite about the publishing process – publishing drafts. not quality control
ACTION: Dom to rewrite, Karl to review

5.1B
no change

5.2C
1 – remove open source or commercial. Encourage the development of proofs of 
concept implementations of the technology. 
2 – change to provide at least one example of the feature, which may also be 
used as the basis of a future test case. 
4 – unclear. Reword Create a template for new feature proposals that includes a 
request for associated test cases. 

5.2D
What does this mean.  Contained within or derived from the specification
2 – reword like 4 above
3 – make first.
1 – follows 3, which is a clarification of the new 1

5E
Use formal languages
ACTION: DOM to write.


Future meetings:
Teleconferences – moved to Wednesdays.  Next call 10 November. Set up special 
telecom for Last Call. 
F2F – during Tech Plenary – week of 28 Feb.

Many thanks to Andrew and the Open Group for excellent meeting facilities, 
providing refreshments/lunch and for the good weather.  

Adjourn.
Received on Friday, 29 October 2004 12:32:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:18 GMT