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

Draft minutes of QAWG's FINAL Teleconference

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:45:36 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Please send comments or corrections...

QA Working Group FINAL Teleconference
Wednesday, 12-September-2005
Scribe: Lofton

(TB) Tim Boland (NIST)
(PC) Patrick Curran (Sun Microsystems)
(DD) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon)
(KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, Chair)
(DH) Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux (W3C)
(LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO)
(RK) Richard Kennedy (Boeing)

(LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST)
(MS) Mark Skall (NIST)


Previous Telcon Minutes:

20050912-1 -- Patrick will send final "Test Metadata" to Karl today.
20050912-2 -- Lofton will comment to Karl today about "normative language" 
changes in "Conformance Clause Template."
20050912-3 -- Karl will try to get "Test Metadata" published on Wednesday.
20050912-4 -- Karl will finish up with getting IG re-chartered, soon.

>2.) Routine Business
>      Lead: Karl Dubost
>      - QA Primer (Graphics)

Done, published.

>      - QA Handbook published

Done, published.

>3.) Test Case Model [1]
>      Lead: Patrick Curran
>      - Editing Work

Editing was done and circulated to QAWG by PC.  Comments were sent to the 
QAWG mailing list be  PC, RK, DM, TB.

>      - Request for publication and shortname on Wednesday.

KD to try to publish "Test Metadata" on Wednesday.

Reviewing comments of DM.

Clarify "constrained text", for "Purpose".  DM--e.g., a short-length 
constraint.  Xpointer as an example?  Some concern about using that as 
primary example, as Xpointer is not widely used.  PC will try to come up 
with another example as primary example, e.g., link to markup/anchors in 
spec text.

Preconditions?  PC has misgivings about the suggestion for 
counter-examples, "..not a precondition".  PC defined precondition, "Test 
will not run unless this condition is met."

Versioning?  After discussion, decided to keep it and incorporate DM's 
comments as an issue to be flagged in the document.

PC:  We should be clear that this metadata is about individual tests / test 
cases, not about the test suite as a whole.  PC will clarify in Introduction.

Reviewing comments of TB:

Test vs Test Case.  PC will clarify in TestFAQ.  Drop "test case" in favor 
of "test".  Further discussion that the terms ought to be defined in the QA 
Glossary (all of 'em should be in the glossary, since "test case" has 
extensive history in QAWG, e.g., in TCDL; but have the glossary deprecate 
"test case" in favor of "test"?)

Suggestion to drop word "conformance".  Agreed.

"Objective evidence of benefit."  Conclusion:  Test metadata is almost 
universal practice, of varying degrees of quality and completeness.  We're 
codifying and suggesting best practice guidance.  PC will add some 
sentences to that effect.

Next:  PC will collect today's changes, and editorial changes, and send to 
KD to implement in the spec.

>4.) Conformance Clause Template [2]
>      Lead: Karl Dubost
>      - Added requirements of Lofton

Done, KD has implemented LH changes.

>      - CSS Problem

Still have IE problem.  LH to review "normative language" changes.

>5.) QA IG Rechartering
>      Lead: Karl Dubost

W3M didn't discuss it last week.  Will do so soon.  KD:  Since we have no 
more work, do we want to close the WG now, before the re-chartering of 
IG?  Decision: anticipate to close as soon as current pending publications 
(only "Test Metadata"?) happen.  TB:  what are participant commitment 
requirements for being active in the (new) IG?  KD:  none, but you will 
have to sign up for the new IG.  LH:  Staff time commitment?  KD:  10% of Karl.

Next anticipated telecon will be in 2 weeks, as a (new) QAIG telecon.

This is the last QAWG telecon.

Adjourned: 11:58 EDT.
Received on Monday, 12 September 2005 16:45:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:36 UTC