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

[ISSUE] Do quality control - Spec GL version 2004-08-30

From: karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 07:54:33 +0900
Message-Id: <0D2C28BA-01EA-11D9-BBA0-000A95718F82@w3.org>
To: 'www-qa-wg@w3.org' <www-qa-wg@w3.org>

I have used the QA Framework: Specification Guidelines
W3C Working Draft 30 August 2004

to review

Mobile SVG Profile: SVG Tiny, Version 1.2
W3C Working Draft 13 August 2004

I have identified a few problems with our current document that would 
be worthwhile to explore.

	ICS-034-Pr: Do quality control during the specification development.
	ICS-035-GP: Do a systematic and thorough review.
	ICS-036-GP: Write sample code or tests.
	ICS-037-GP: Write Test Assertions.

These guidelines, I think, are very important, because they improve a 
lot the quality of a specification. Though there is an issue, because 
for an external reviewers, they are almost impossible to assert or to 
deny. At the start I thought that Specification Guidelines Spec was 
wrong and it was not the right place for these guidelines, that maybe 
it should be in the QA Handbook.
	But you can also see it in another way.
What about if in fact there are hidden profiles in Specification 
Guidelines, the same way there will be with an authoring tool and a 
rendering tool. Classes of products of Spec Guidelines are:
	- W3C Specifications
	- External reviewers (not part of the WG)
	- Internal reviewers (part of the WG)
	- Tools to check the comformity against the specification GL (ICS is 
one which is manual)

Depending on the class of product, you can implement every guidelines 
or not. For the ICS 34 to ICS 37, you can only reply if you are part of 
the WG which designing the specification.

What do you think?

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2004 22:54:35 UTC

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