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

Re: answer to TAG issue on positive statements for non applicability

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 18:21:22 +0200
Message-ID: <81650846.20050503182122@w3.org>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa@w3.org

On Tuesday, May 3, 2005, 5:03:49 PM, Karl wrote:

KD> Dear Chris,

KD> Thanks for your comments on the Last Call version of the QA Framework:
KD> Specification Guidelines[0] - 22 November 2004


KD> Original comments (issues 1151, 1143, and part of 1158):
KD> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Mar/0007.html
KD> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Mar/0015.html
KD> also relates to:
KD> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Mar/att-0014/ 
KD> qaframework-recursiveconformance.html footnotes 6, 8, 9

KD> The QA Working Group agrees that for deprecated, obsolete, optional
KD> features and subdivisions, it was not clear how a specification could
KD> match the requirements if none of these were present in the
KD> specification. To clarify this, the Good Practices and Requirements have
KD> been amended. For instance, the "Identify deprecated features" now reads
KD> in "What does it mean?":
KD>     If the specified technology has already been published in a previous
KD>     version of the specification, indicate the features from the
KD>     previous version now deprecated or state in the conformance section
KD>     that no features were deprecated.
KD> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#deprecated- 
KD> feature-principle

Thank you for the response. It partially satisfies the concerns I
raised.

A first publication of a specification can still have deprecated
features, if there was a previous poorly documented, undocumented, or
defined-by-implementation version. Does your wording imply that a
specification at version 1.0 can still be conformant even if it does not
state "There are no deprecated features"?

The wording "or state in the conformance section that no features were
deprecated" is a welcome addition.

When filling in the proforma, should this go under yes (with a link to
the statement that there are no deprecated features) or n/a ? I suggest
that a link from "yes" is better, and request that the spec clarify
this.

Requirement 12: Identify deprecated features.

might be better as

Requirement 12: Identify deprecated features or state that there are
none.

Similarly, in the techniques section, an additional item with

 State that "There are no deprecated features" and ensure this statement
 can be linked to

would be useful.

KD> Similarly for:
KD> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#subdivide-foster-gp
KD> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#label-options-gp
KD> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#obsolete-gp


KD> [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/





-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 16:22:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:36 UTC