- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
- Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:32:57 +0100
- To: "Kirill Gavrylyuk" <kirillg@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
comments inlined general remark: my name is misspoelled at some points, it should be Dimitris On Friday, December 7, 2001, at 07:15 PM, Kirill Gavrylyuk wrote: > Please review the minutes before we send them to www-qa@w3.org. Thanks! > > Draft Minutes 2001-12-06 QA Working Group Teleconference > -- > Attendees: > Daniel Dardailler, W3C, Co Chair > Dimitris Dimitriadis, DOM WG, DOM test suite > Karl DuBost, W3C, Co Chair > Kirill Gavrylyuk, Microsoft > Dominique Hazael-Massieux, WebMaster, W3C, > Lofton Henderson, CoChair > Rob Lanphier, Real Networks, > Lynne Rosenthal, NIST, CoChair > Selim Aissi, Intel, > Olivier Thereaux, W3C, > Peter Fawsett, Real Networks > > Regrets: > Katie Haritos-Shea, W3C > Mark Skall, NIST > > Absent: > Andrew Thackrah > Max Froumentin, W3C > Carbo Oriol, LTG > Gerald Oskoboiny, W3C > > Minutes: > > Lofton: > Review agenda as posted. Rearranged the order as following. > ** Framework documents > - endorse direction and partitioning > - content comments & suggestions > - plan for FPWD of Introduction. > - plan for FPWD of Process & Operational Guidelines > ** Organization of WG life: mail lists, next telecon. > ** Lynne Rosenthal's "Conformance Requirements" doc > ** Issues tracking > **Web site > ** Review of Action items lists (see Brussels minutes). > > Lofton: Any additions? > Dimitris: Suggested everybody to present themselves. > All: presented themselves. > > ** Framework documents > Lofton: Gave short overview of future set of Frameworks document. > Timeline: > Introduction is due to mid December, > Operational and Process guidelines by mid Jan, > > Lynne: Could you elaborate on the difference between operational > guidelines and process guidelines? > Lofton: Process guidelines are set of guidelines that ties test and > spec material production and the Charter with W3C Process. > Operational guidelines are set of guidelines that that helps to set up > operations in QA Activity within WG; > KD: So the process is more high level and operational is more detailed. > > Lofton: Question: Does the structure and the document split seem > reasonable? > Did the move of the Process guidelines from Introduction make sense? > Lynne: Structure seems to be reasonable. > Everybody:agreed. > Dimitries: Would like to participate in editing of operational and > process guidelines. > Kirill, Lofton: welcomed. > Action item: Kirill, Lofton and Dimiotris to discuss the work load > offline. > > Lofton: Question:Is it reasonable to push the 1st document in mid > December and 2dn and January. > Everybody: agreed to release Introduction and Operational & Process > guidelines together. > Action item: for Lofton, Kirill and Dimitris to define timeline. > > Lofton: gave quick overview of the "Introduction" document > Kirill: quick summmary of the "Operational and Process" document. > Action item: everybody to review posted 2 documents for structure, > depth of content, target and focus, > especially Chapter4 in Introduction, Chapter 2, Section 2.4 and 2.5. > > > ** Organization of WG life: Web site, mail lists, next telecon. > > Lofton: Documents development/discussion - we need to agree how to > organize this. > Issue: we have very little time on teleconf. We should deal with > technical issues on the mail list. > Lofton: We have 2 lists, we were conducting everything in public so > far. How do we proceed with these 2 lists further? > > All: Discussion on what to do with 2 mailing lists www-qa and > www-qa-wg, what questions to discuss on which mailing list. > > Concluded and agreed that we will: > > ** use www-qa-wg for interim-draft discussions, issue discussions, > developmental discussions, etc. > ** www-qa-wg will be mail-able only by the 15 or so people on the list > (basically, Brussels attendees plus subsequent telcon joiners). > ** www-qa-wg archive will remain open to public. > [dd] We also noted that issues brought up on the public list (www-qa) should be closely monitored and reported to the WG, presumbaly by the chair or co-chair. > Teleconferences schedule. Concluded and agreed that one 1-hour telcon > per month was > not enough. To generate and keep momentum, we need more frequent and > longer. Therefore: > > - next telcon will be in two week (2001-12-20), > - it will be 1-1/2 hours. > - the following one is still 2002-01-03 (and 1-1/2 hours). > - it will be 2 hours earlier -- 2pm EST -- to make easier European > participation. > - evaluate, after holidays, whether more frequent than 2 weeks is > needed. > > Action item: KD or DD to get bridge for 12/20, 2pm - 3:30pm > > Between telcons. All detailed work on active technical topics and issue > will be done by email (www-qa-wg), as we don't have (even at 2-week > intervals) sufficient time to deal with many in detail. > > > ** Lynne Rosenthal's "Conformance Requirements" doc > Lynne: Introduced the Conform Require document that she submitted > earlier in the week. > The document should be viewed as input to the Spec Framework. It > focuses on the conformance > statements part of a specification. The document which was originally > developed in OASIS's Conformance TC, > and currently contains both an OASIS and W3C flavor. Request that the > document be > reviewed and comments welcomed. Better examples are needed and if > people could indicate whether the examples > should only be W3C related examples. > > ** Issues tracking > > Three options were identified. Two from the "Temporary > Issues List" on the ../QA/WG page. Dimitris mentioned an issue tracker > (web service?) from Source Forge, that DOM uses. > > Action item: Dimitris to send pointer. > [dd] (to avoid inlcuding it in issues list for next telcon) > Action item: All, email discussion and resolution of Issues-tracking > issue, asap. > > **Web site. > Karl discussed beginning to form a policy for re-structuring the > Web site, and on what pages to put various contents. > > Action. Dom, KD, OT to work out and present a proposal for Web site > re-org. > > ** Review of Action items lists (see Brussels minutes). > LH. Declared that all Agenda issues have been > addressed. [LH-correction. We didn't go through the Brussels Action > Items > list for AI statuses.] > > > Summary of New and old Action Items for next meeting: > > A-2001-12-06-1: Kirill, Lofton and Dimiotris to discuss the work load > offline. > A-2001-12-06-2: for Lofton, Kirill and Dimitris to define timeline. > A-2001-12-06-3: everybody to review posted 2 documents for structure, > depth of content, target and focus, > especially Chapter4 in Introduction, Chapter 2, Section 2.4 and 2.5. > A-2001-12-06-4: Karl or Daniel to get bridge for teleconf 12/20, 2pm - > 3:30pm > A-2001-12-06-5: Dimitris to send pointer to source-forge issues > tracking system. Resolved. > A-2001-12-06-6: All, email discussion and resolution of Issues-tracking > issue, asap. > A-2001-12-06-7: Dominique, Karl, Olivier to work out and present a > proposal for Web site re-org. > > Next teleconferences dates > > - 2001-12-20 ,2pm - 3:30pm EST; > - 2002-01-03 ,2pm - 3:30pm EST; > > > Meeting adjourned at 5:30pm EST. > > > --- Dimitris Dimitriadis dimitris@ontologicon.com http://www.ontologicon.com
Received on Friday, 7 December 2001 19:35:18 UTC