- From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 00:21:20 +0200
- To: Jack Morrison <Jack.Morrison@sun.com>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org, Philippe Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
one comment inlined On Monday, April 15, 2002, at 10:00 , Jack Morrison wrote: > [...] > 49 - Should there be a global (W3C-standard) license for use and > distribution of test materials? > CLOSED - Olivier reviewed the DOM test suite license and it was quite > restrictive. He is working on rewording it and when done feels we might > be able to use it. Lofton to split this issue into two: > 59 - licenses under which external contributions are accepted by WG; > 49 - licenses under which WG provides its test materials to the public; > Dimitris to provide proposed wording on how external tests are to be > accepted by the WG. > [dd] This issue is being looked into by the DOM WG chair as well, let me coordinate and get back to this list. > Next Telcon: > > LH discussed the need for an extra meeting the week of 4/08. It was > felt that in order to have documents ready prior to the AC meeting that > another a couple of special calls might be needed. The meeting was > scheduled for Thursday, 4/11/02 at 2:00EST. The agenda will be to > review the Specification Guidelines, using the same baisc format used > for the Operational Guidelines checkpoints. > > Next Meeting > Thursday, April 11, 2002 > 2PM EST > > Meeting adjourned at 3:30PM EST. > > > > > > > FINAL MINUTES > QA Working Group Teleconference > > Friday, 4-April-2002 > > Scribe: Jack Morrison > > Attendees: > > (KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, WG co-chair) > > (KG) Kirill Gavrylyuk (Microsoft) > > (dd) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon) > > (LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO - WG co-chair) > > (JM) Jack Morrison (Sun) > > (LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST - IG co-chair) > > (OT) Olivier Thereaux (W3C - systems) > > Dave Marston > > Regrets: > > (MS) Mark Skall (NIST) > > (DD) Daniel Dardailler (W3C - IG co-chair) > > (DH) Dominique Hazael-Massieux (W3C - Webmaster) > > Absent: > > (PF) Peter Fawcett (Real Networks) > > (KH) Katie Haritos-Shea (DOC) > > (AT) Andrew Thackrah (Open Group) > > Summary of New Action Items: > > A-2002-04-04-1 - KD – update next week on F2F status > > A-2002-04-04-2 - LH – reserve bridge for next meeting > > A-2002-04-04-3 - OT – Resolve issue of central bibliography in QA > Framework: Introduction > > A-2002-04-04-4 – LH – split Issue 49 into two separate issues. > > A-2002-04-04-5 – KG – clarification of conformance section in OG > > A-2002-04-04-6 – dd – provide proposed wording on how external tests > are to be accepted by the WG > > Previous Telcon Minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa- > wg/2002Apr/0012.html > > Minutes: > > Housekeeping Items: > > 1. Discussed that those editing the website using Amaya need to be > careful about document types as under some circumstances the editor > will change the type from Strict to Transitional. Also, the AI list is > out of date and needs to be updated (see below). > 2. Discussed adjusting the meeting time to allow Asia and Europe to > participate at more reasonable times. Postponed any decision until next > week as most members from Europe were unable to attend today. > 3. Karl is working on organizing the next F2F, should have more > information next week, > > QA Framework Document Schedule: > > 1. The editors felt they would be able to post the latest drafts this > weekend, WG only, including the two new documents. > 2. The original goal was to have the first Technical Report for ALL > the documents done by early April, but postponed it by a month. There > was some discussion about whether or not we could be ready before the > next AC meeting, and we were reminded that we need to meet the pre-AC > publication deadline, which as a week or so earlier than the meeting. > DD felt the Specification Guidelines (3A) might not be ready, but that > the Operational Guidelines (2A) would. It was asked that the editors > think about whether Operational Examples and Techniques (2B) could be > moved up so the first draft was before the AC deadline. > > Issues: > > The rest of the meeting dealt with a review of the Issues List. > > 42 - Where should the Taxonomy document be kept? > > CLOSED - After some discussion it was agreed that for now this could > stay as a separate document. > > 20 - Should the QA WG web page have a central bibliography index to > notes and other documents? > > CLOSED – Olivier to resolve. > > 24 - Appeal process when QA WG rejects a request from WG > > POSTPONED – Was discussed if this needed to be in the QA process > documentation. Postponed until Issue 53 is resolved. > > 33 - Guideline for minimum level of WG commitment to QA > > CLOSED – the table has been revised but level 3 is still the minimum > > 37 - Coordination of QA work with external entities > > CLOSED – See Chapter 3 of OG > > 38 - Resolutions of external QA requests > > CLOSED – See Chapter 3 of OG > > 28 - Test maintenance task force > > CLOSED – See Guideline 8 > > 29 - Should there be a checkpoint about publication of testing results? > > CLOASED – See Guideline 6.7 > > 40 - Test Materials home > > CLOSED – The overlap between documents has been resolved. > > 17 - Where should conformance test materials reside after a WG disbands? > > CLOSED – > > 19 - Should each Framework document have a "Glossary" appendix? > > CLOSED – The Introduction explains some terms and points to a QA > Glossary. Agreed we would take out the reference, as long as everyone > dealt with defining terms when they first used them. Currently this is > not in the Specification Guidelines. > > 57 - Use of RFC2119 in Operational Guidelines > > CLOSED - This was discussed at length, and a number of examples were > reviewed. The conclusion was that "Should = Must, unless you have a > very good reason why not". Agreed on recommendation "b) Keep using the > keywords and specify in the conformance clause that for each subset of > checkpoints having the same priority, keywords "MUST", "SHOULD", etc. > in the checkpoint text and in the description text must be honored as > prescribed in [RFC2119]." Kirill to add clarification to conformance > section for next public draft. > > 39 - Use of Keywords SHOULD, SHALL, etc > > OPEN – Agreed that for the next public draft (after the WG drafts), we > must review the guidelines and checkpoints for normative usage. > > 49 - Should there be a global (W3C-standard) license for use and > distribution of test materials? > > CLOSED - Olivier reviewed the DOM test suite license and it was quite > restrictive. He is working on rewording it and when done feels we might > be able to use it. Lofton to split this issue into two: > > 59 - licenses under which external contributions are accepted by WG; > > 49 - licenses under which WG provides its test materials to the public; > > Dimitris to provide proposed wording on how external tests are to be > accepted by the WG. > > Next Telcon: > > LH discussed the need for an extra meeting the week of 4/08. It was > felt that in order to have documents ready prior to the AC meeting that > another a couple of special calls might be needed. The meeting was > scheduled for Thursday, 4/11/02 at 2:00EST. The agenda will be to > review the Specification Guidelines, using the same baisc format used > for the Operational Guidelines checkpoints. > > Next Meeting > > Thursday, April 11, 2002 > > 2PM EST > > Meeting adjourned at 3:30PM EST. > > > > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 15 April 2002 18:21:22 UTC