- From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 13:05:21 -0600 (MDT)
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- cc: Brian Kelly <b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>, www-qa@w3.org
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Al Gilman wrote: > At 10:35 AM 2001-10-22 , Alex Rousskov wrote: > > > >> Would addressing this issue be within the scope of the QA activity? > > > >Not in my opinion. QA can encourage WGs to develop and use terminology > >documents, but it should be WGs responsibility to define the terms > >they use. Besides, "Web terminology" is too broad of a scope to allow > >for practical standardization (IMHO). > > > > A finite objective that would be a quality topic IMHO is a simple > "best practices" output on handling Terms of Art in the W3C > process. This includes standards for when a Term of Art is used, > how to review supposed Terms of Art for elimination, adjustment or > adoption, and how to handle Terms of Art in the corpus of W3C > publications. Yes, I agree. Alex.
Received on Monday, 22 October 2001 15:06:06 UTC