W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > November 2001

[www-qa] Vertical/horizontal roles of WGs (was: input document for f2f)

From: <David_Marston@lotus.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 07:02:34 -0500
To: www-qa@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFA9686372.0D19BE1D-ON85256AFF.00412374@lotus.com>

Responding to Daniel D:
>There is mention ... [of] thinking long terms about reorganizing W3C
>with a more "horizontal domain" of activity, maybe with a QA larger
>hat this time.

That could tend to slow down the issuance of Recommendations. Some
will say that slowing down is good, while others will dislike the extra
burdens. The debate should rage elsewhere, though.

>>...we must not foster the thought that quality is applied by an external
>>force after the WG creates a draft or CR; the WG itself is responsible
>>for doing their work under the guidance of this Framework and other
>>statements about quality.

>not sure what you mean but QA is clearly charter to improve the
>documents W3C produces, not just the implementation people produces
>out of these documents.

I just meant that the existence of a QA WG and IG does not allow the
Rec-track WGs to externalize their quality concerns. While adding this
QA Activity, we also want WGs to add Quality experts to their own
membership, and every member of every WG should feel responsible for
quality. Improving the documents coming from the Rec-track WGs is
certainly my #1 hope for the QA WG!
.................David Marston
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 07:04:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:28 UTC