W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > August 2005

Re: After Life for QA WG - Some Projects to work on

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 10:41:31 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20050805085301.042fdf98@localhost>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>,"'www-qa-wg@w3.org'" <www-qa-wg@w3.org>

About the possible integration of "Taxonomy" and "Test FAQ" -- how did we 
leave that question and potential (small) project?

-Lofton.


At 03:30 PM 7/26/2005 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:

>QA WG,
>
>this is a proposal of things that could be done after the QA WG has
>closed. All these ideas are open to discussions, comments and
>concrete proposals. As a side note, all of these will work only if
>people are inclined to work on them. It might be worthwhile to
>discuss them, but it's even better if you think you can commit time
>for it, to evaluate this time. It doesn't have to be a  lot of time.
>     Sometimes 30 minutes by week could be as valuable
>     for a project than 1 day every two months.
>
>You can propose also other projects.
>
>
>Project I:  Test Markup Language
>
>     The start of a vocabulary is available on the wiki.
>        http://esw.w3.org/topic/TestCaseMetadata
>
>These words have a short definition
>     - identification
>     - name
>     - purpose
>     - description
>     - status
>     - versioning
>     - link to spec(s)
>     - link to issue(s)
>     - dependencies
>     - grouping
>     - variability-driven filtering criteria
>     - input (or pre/post conditions?)
>     - expected result
>
>
>     First part of the work, for each word of this vocabulary.
>         Time/Resource: 2 days for 2 persons
>
>     - is it required or not,
>     - any syntax requirements,
>     - description of it,
>     - any dependencies, and
>     - example.
>
>     Need to develop an outline of the type of information needed
>     for each item. For now, just try to expand on a few items
>     and then when we see what we get and need, we can make
>     it more formalized. For each item, think about what is
>     needed to describe it.
>
>This will set a kind of requirements document or model for a Test
>Markup Language.
>
>     Second phase:
>     Creating the specification for a language. This is not feasible
>if not a lot of people participating.
>
>
>* Specification Reviews against QA Framework Specification Guidelines.
>
>     The specifications can be announced on the www-qa ML and people
>could review  them. Depending of the specifications it can be more or
>less long to do. The benefits of such work,
>     - we improve specifications quality,
>     - you improve your technological skills.
>
>
>* QA Spec Conformance Clause Template
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/SpecGL-template-root.html
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Jul/ thread.html#20
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Finalize the QA Conformance Clause Template for QA Specl GL
>
>
>* QA Spec Conformance Clause Form
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/SpecGL-template-root.html
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Jul/ thread.html#20
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Make a form to ease the editing.
>
>* QA Process Document Template
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/QAH-qapd-root.html
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Finish the templates
>
>* QA Process Document Form
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/QAH-qapd-root.html
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Make a form to ease the editing.
>
>
>* QA Charter
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/QAH-charter.html
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Create a template to help Staff contacts to take QA into account
>in charter writing.
>
>
>
>* How to define elements in Markup Language
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Jul/thread.html#6
>     Time/Ressource: 1 week for 2 persons
>     Initiator: Bjoern Hoehrmann
>
>     Elements are defined in many ways in specifications. Could we
>create a best practices guides on how to define elements (features)
>in a specification and then propose the markup for it.
>
>
>* QA Primer
>     http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qaframe-primer
>     Time/Resource: 3 days for 1 person
>
>     Rewriting and reorganization a bit of the QA Primer to make it
>more appealing to editors.
>
>
>* XMLSpec Analysis with regards to QA Framework
>     http://www.w3.org/2002/xmlspec/
>     Time/Resource: 2 weeks for 2 persons
>
>     XMLSpec is a tool/vocabulary to write W3C specifications. The
>goal of the work is to analyze how the vocabulary can be modified, or
>which vocabulary to add that it makes easier to implement QA
>Framework Specification Guidelines.
>
>
>* XMLSpec Tutorial
>     http://www.w3.org/2002/xmlspec/
>     Time/Resource: 3 weeks for 2 persons
>
>     Writing a guide to use XMLSpec
>
>
>* XMLSpec <-> XHTML tools
>     http://www.w3.org/2002/xmlspec/
>     Time/Resource: 3 weeks for 2 persons
>
>     Create tools to be able to edit with XHTML and classes and to
>convert it with XMLSpec.
>
>
>
>
>--
>Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
>W3C Conformance Manager
>*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
>
>
Received on Friday, 5 August 2005 16:41:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Friday, 5 August 2005 16:41:18 GMT