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

Re: QA Conformance Clause Template

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:32:59 -0400
Message-Id: <327D18C8-CCF7-46E0-A91D-A18D5D1EDF1C@w3.org>
Cc: "'www-qa-wg@w3.org'" <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>


Le 05-07-20 à 11:41, Lofton Henderson a écrit :
>> do you have news for the Conformance Clause Template?
>>     http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/08/SpecGL-template-root.html
>> Would you be able to throw it in the mailing list an outline of it if
>> not yet completed.
>
> I'm not sure if I understand the question.  So I'll tell you about  
> the status.

yep I changed my mind in the middle of the sentence. Usual me. :p

> You are indeed pointing to the current version of the template,  
> which then points to two variations:
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2004/08/SpecGL-template-text.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2004/08/qaire-3-field.html
>
> It has been my desire and intention to finish work on them.  But  
> best intentions sometimes get postponed because of lack of time.   
> What remains to be done is as follows:
>
> [1] is a you-edit, text (HTML) version.  It is mostly complete, but  
> has a couple of flagged questions.  It probably needs to be checked  
> for final alignment with SpecGL (are all of its bits okay for a  
> Conformance Clause, and is it missing any important bits).

The [1] seems feasible in a reasonable time. Going through your  
questions list.


* [Ed note. Adding div/class markup to this template is yet tbd.]
     I will do.

* [Ed note. TBD. Is it going to contain example links? It would  
probably help user complete the template item.]
     Two solutions can be proposed. Either we link back to the  
appropriate section of SpecGL, or we add particular examples.  
Sometimes a simple link to a specification, will not be enough  
without explaining the example. I don't have strong opinions. Maybe  
the easier is to link to specGL when needed?


* Understanding your notation.
     I'm not sure I have understood the blue boxes with this kind of  
information.

        [Having a Conformance Clause like this satisfies
      @@Pr/GPx.y;@@] [Quick examples: @@Example 1@@; @@Example 2@@;
     @@Example 3@@] [@@Detailed examples & techniques.@@]

     Could you give me a hint? Is it for us to find in SpecGL the  
related section.

* Improving the layout and the CSS
     I think we could give a bit more readability for the users, by  
really making obvious what they should do themselves. :) I volunteer  
to do that.

* Normative language.
     - either RFC 2119
         The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED",
         "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
         "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
         document are to be interpreted as described
         in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
     - other
         What do you suggest here Lofton?
         One of the technique in
         http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#consistent-style-tech

* [Ed note. Might (or might not) want to get rid of CoP terminology  
and replace it w/ something more common. But it is a convenient  
handle for now.]
     Not sure we have to get rid of the expression "class of  
products" it really depends of the examples given in the section here.

* Clarity for CoP.
     In the template, you say "Each of the following subsections  
discusses and defines ". You meant "Each of the following subsections  
of FooML discusses and defines".  Is there a requirement to link back  
to the appropriate part of the specification or just a list of  
section is enough.

* Could you talk a bit more about the section "Conformance  
Designations"?

* Conformance Claims
     Valid is fine.

* ICS pro-forma
     It will be optional :) it's already an optional Good Practice. :)


> [2] is a sample of an interactive form to query the editor for  
> information, then generate a skeleton Conformance Clause.  It needs  
> to be finished, and I need to write the PHP processor to process  
> the form.  (There is a sample already, and if you fill in the 3- 
> section form at [2] and 'Submit', you'll see the processed result.)

Once [1] is done. It should not be too hard.

-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:32:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Wednesday, 20 July 2005 18:32:46 GMT