- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 01:59:38 +0200
- To: "Nils Ulltveit-Moe" <nils@u-moe.no>
- Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org, wp3_eiao@osys.grm.hia.no, wp5_eiao@osys.grm.hia.no, "public-annotea-dev@w3.org" <public-annotea-dev@w3.org>
Cross-posted to public-annotea-dev - annotea followup better there I think (EARL use case stuff should go back to the public-wai-ert list) I think it would be useful to read the threads Mark Smith motivated on the public-annotea-dev list, because he is thinking on very similar lines... have a look at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotea-dev/2005JanMar/thread.html where there are a few threads, totalling about 15 messages, essentially discussing the mechanics of using annotea to store bugzilla-type information... cheers Chaals (lots of context included below for annotea folks). On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 22:51:51 +0200, Nils Ulltveit-Moe <nils@u-moe.no> wrote: > Hi Charles, > > s�n, 17,.04.2005 kl. 11.59 +0200, skrev Charles McCathieNevile: > AccMonitor is a tool for managing large websites, that can check them > over >> every day and report on a whole lot of stuff. I think it can also direct >> some manual testing to be done - for example guided by where there are >> common problems that arise of one kind. >> >> I think this is an important use case to develop. >> >> A further related example would be doing specGL reviews over time on a >> specification, (such as EARL :-) to ensure that we are improving in the >> way we are meeting the various QA requirements that a W3C spec should >> before it gets to Recommendation. > > This is interesting! I have thought of some way of doing this, by > marrying AnnoZilla, PyNotea (my Python based Annotea server) and > BugZilla, to create a tool for performing document and code inspections > by annotating issues in the document. AnnoZilla is almost there now, the > only thing that would be needed is some other categories of annotations > that were more in line with code and document inspections. > > In this way it would be easier to track if and how an issue had been > dealt with. You could also use this for requirements tracking, if all > requirements were stored in the bug/feature database. > > I have been thinking if and how EARL would fit into this scheme? I am > not convinced that it fits in yet. -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Monday, 18 April 2005 00:00:04 UTC