ATAG Conformance - my action item

Per my action item from the 10 Nov 2008 AUWG teleconference, I
investigated the definition of "authoring tool" and the "conformance 
section", both from [1].
As background and a reference point against which to evaluation the ATAG2.0
specification, I used the material in the W3C Quality Assurance Specification
Guidelines "Specifying Conformance" section [2].

Comments/questions on Conformance section from [1]:

I think conformance section should make it clear that authoring tools are the
"class of products" that need to conform - authoring tools are what needs to
conform, not authors or other entities. Furthermore, the conformance section
should state how authoring tools need to conform (either included directly
or by reference). Everything related to conformance - what is to conform and
how? - should be included in the conformance section. The conformance
section should state how an authoring tool should satisfy the success
criteria in the guidelines section (for example, which levels, how
many at each level, etc.) and be very specific (maybe link to the
"levels of conformance" and following "WCAG" sections presented
earlier in the document from the conformance section?). Everything
related to conformance
should be in one place if possible..

Is our definition of "collection of software components" consistent
with our definition of authoring tool (multiple applications??
distinguish between application and component?)?

Does a claim allow for satisfaction of some (but not all) level As,
some (but not all) level AAs, and/or some (but not all) level AAAs?
Is this a realistic scenario?

For platforms, we're not testing the platforms, right? Just the
authoring tools? Also, do we have a definition for Web-based user
interface functionality?

Comments/questions on definition of authoring tool from [1]:

For definition of authoring tool, "why do we have "used by other
people" at end?
Is this necessary, or even testable (testing intent?), since I assume
that this definition is normative.
In the definition of authoring tools, "web content" should be linked to the
definition.. Do we need a definition of "application", or is it obvious?

For note 1, guidelines should not place any requirements on the
ability of authors? - authoring tools are what's being tested, not
authors?

For note 2, do we have a definition of "live content authoring tool"?
If so, should we link to it? If not, should we create one? Is a live
content authoring tool a corrent subcategory of our authoring tool
definition?

Thanks and best wishes
Tim Boland NIST

[1]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2008/WD-ATAG20-20081028/
[2]: http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/#specifying-conformance