W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > August 2020

Re: Agenda for Silver meeting of 14 August 2020

From: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:06:56 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMpCG4F_qYkQwkT8tZVfW27x_b2GwNPJugqn-y3Myz1BwETQ5Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
Cc: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
On slide 5 it says
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1yZLF29X3SoDyn1ph8KSTn5nYCC_P4E6fw1zbrUo35uA/edit#slide=id.g903efe37cd_0_0


"Functional Outcomes are: More granular than success criteria"

This is not the case for all Functional Outcomes I've seen so far, instead
it's the opposite, they are much more loosely written and will be even more
loose when written in plain language.

Can we show evidence of them being more granular?
Thanks!

Op do 13 aug. 2020 om 23:28 schreef Jeanne Spellman <
jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>:

> agenda+ Joint meetings with AGWG 18 August (Rachael)
>
> agenda+ Survey on editorial notes (AGWG)
>
> agenda+ Conformance changes from Deep Dive
>
> agenda+ Need for test examples
>
> agenda+ Decision Policy
>
> agenda+ Metrics for Conformance
>
> == Links ==
>
> Survey on Editorial Notes
> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2020Aug/0018.html>
>
> Revised Conformance Proposal (slides)
> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1yZLF29X3SoDyn1ph8KSTn5nYCC_P4E6fw1zbrUo35uA/>
>
> Draft Decision Policy
> <https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/decision-policy-MC/decision-policy/index.html>
>
> Decision Policy Survey
> <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/94845/2020-08-decision-policy/results>
>
> Metrics for Conformance
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dingDd116FVx0QuxCemgHbReJfNxMZRSF1q3dJ9Uj5U/>
>
> == Conference Call Info ==
>
> https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_silver-fri
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2020 09:07:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:49 UTC