Re: [Action] Software to support the validation process


Quoting Carlos A Velasco <>:
> Hi all,
> In the last call, we discussed three different software
> possibilities
> (actually lying under two categories: Wikis and issue tracking
> systems)
> to support the whole validation process of the test samples generated
> by
> the task force, or sent by third parties, namely: Wiki (whichever
> software supported by W3C system's people), Bugzilla
> <> (also supported by W3C) and JIRA
> <>.
> The software must support the assignment of validators, the
> highlighting
> of issues and validation errors, communication with the author, etc.
> - Wikis have the advantage, that have a simpler interface for users,
> but
> they will be have a bigger load to manage and monitor results and
> progress (sorry, my personal bias, although I know I should be
> neutral).

One argument that was raised in favour of a bug tracking system and 
against a wiki, was that a bug tracking system like JIRA can send an e-
mail to the submitter of the test sample (and probably also to other 
interested parties, if my understanding is correct) when the bug 
changes. However, it appears that there is similar functionality in 
some wiki software: wikis always have a "history" or "recent changes" 
page, and this page can have an Atom or RSS feed, so anyone who's 
interested can be notified of changes.
* the css-discuss wiki: 
(go to "RecentChanges" and select the link "[RSS feed]");
* Wikimedia meta wiki: (go to 
"Recent changes" and then select either "RSS" or "atom" in the 
* SWiK wiki: (go to "Recent Edits", then 
"Subscribe"; this feed is not so useful, unfortunately).

So if we have a Wiki with 
* an overview page (list of test samples, assigned to whom, ...), and
* one page per test case or test sample (with a "recent changes" feed),
I think that can also work.

I admit that I'm prejudiced against issue tracking systems because of 
my experience with Bugzilla (just finding stuff in it, let alone 
changing things ... ).

> - Bugzilla has a not so-friendly UI, and there are not too many
> possibilities to customise it. Good news is that W3C system's people
> will provide some level of support (TBD).
> - JIRA seems the most customisable and user friendly option (IMHO),
> at
> least to monitor and manage. The bad news is that we will be on our
> own,
> from the installation to the backup.
> Thus, the question is now which option you think is suitable, to
> select
> it as soon as possible.

Best regards,


Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51 


Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 14:55:43 UTC