W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Fwd: QA Ops Guidelines and OWL WG

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 09:52:07 +0300
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200309120952.07114.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Jim:
> We have received this request from the QA working group.  On one 
> hand, it looks like some work, on the other hand, it could improve 
> our product as well as providing valuable feedback to the QA WG and 
> helping them with their CR. 

another one we forgot to discuss.

I had a brief a look at their editors draft, and based on this para: 

>By applying, we don't mean to say "comply" but only going thru the 
>Ops checklist and report to the QAWG what they think they're already 
>doing, what they expect to do in the future (and by when), and what 
>they don't expect to do (with rationales). 

I think this is largely a matter of form filling.
There are certainly some parts which we do not comply with.

I feel some obligation to accept this task, since I remain critical of the QA 
work. I would like to see someone else on the WG also sign up, the actual 
activity looks like:

1) extract the checkpoints from the CR
2) add text to say what we did and why
3) add further discursive text on our quality experience
4) WG review

I would be happy to do a process with someone else where one of use does (1) 
and then we split the checkpoints in half and do (2) and then review the 
other half. I guess I would then have something to say under (3).

It would be best to do this with someone who is not in-tune with my QA-bashing 
... maybe Sandro or Evan.

My suspicion is that getting actual "improvements in our product" would be 
more costly than the group is prepared for.

Jeremy
Received on Friday, 12 September 2003 03:52:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:02 GMT