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

QAF Primer and User Scenarios comments

From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 22:23:55 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org, lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Reading through the Primer and User Scenarios - found these typos, grammar, 
etc.  No real issues, but I did have a question as to the meaning of a few 

1. Spell out 'spec’

2 Introduction
Add (planned) after Test Guidelines [QAF-TEST]

3. Audiences
All Participants
Change last ‘specifications’ to ‘specification’

Spec editors and authors (remove spec or make it capital S)
- add ‘of’ after understanding
- change order of ‘examples, tools, and templates’ to ‘examples, templates 
and tools’ (this is also consistent with how it is listed later)
- reword last part of last sentence since SpecGL does more than structure 
and formats (in fact it doesn’t do much of that).  Suggest, ‘…valuable 
resource in organizing and writing a high-quality specification, 
facilitating its production.

3. First Step  QA commitment, 2nd paragraph
remove ‘the’, ‘…and if the it is able to anticipate…’

4. Planning and Writing the Spec  modify the list
remove ‘writing with test assertions
reword first bullet to ‘conformance policy, clause and claims’
reword last bullet to ‘profiles, levels, modules’

5. Reviewing and Progressing the Spec
2nd para, ‘…it gives and informed set of evaluation criteria’  what is 
meant by ‘informed set’

last paragraph, suggest remove ‘conformance’ from ‘..significant 
conformance test materials…’  This would make it a broader statement.  The 
tests may not be conformance tests.

Received on Tuesday, 28 September 2004 02:27:44 UTC

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