W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > May 2002

RE: D-AC001.2 discussion points

From: Dilber, Ayse, ALASO <adilber@att.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 09:31:26 -0400
Message-ID: <5C2CE23B27AC4D449F75AFF4560419F60388B7B1@OCCLUST04EVS1.ugd.att.com>
To: "Christopher Ferris" <chris.ferris@sun.com>, "wsawg public" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
i support chris' sugesstion to capture this as the team CSF.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:56 AM
To: wsawg public
Subject: D-AC001.2 discussion points


ATT: replace it with:

Liaison with WS-I Testing WG to ensure that the development of standards-based
technologies identify conformance in such a way that testing software can
be constructed

MITRE: Sounds awkward to me.  Other working groups would be responsible for
producing protocol specs that are testable.  I don;t see how the architecture
document "ensures ... that testing software can be constructed."

NOK: 'Ensures that the development of standards-based
technologies identify...'

Since we do not develop technologies, does this
imply that we impose conformance requirements
on the WGs we charter and, potentially, on
previously chartered WGs in the W3C WS Activity?

SAG: "Ensures that the development of standards-based technologies identify
conformance in such a way that testing software can be constructed." This is
definitely too ambitious for a reference architecture.  That's a job for an
individual specification.

Comment from the Chair: Can this be rephrased to capture as a "Team" CSF
that the WG will, in proposing any charters for new WGs, require that the
chartered WG [SHOULD|MUST] provide conformance test criteria for any
published (LC, CR, PR, Rec) specifications?
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2002 09:32:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:59 GMT