W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > August 2002

DOM WG Specification questionnaire

From: Dimitris Dimitriadis <dimitris@ontologicon.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 15:15:29 +0300
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <5856EE66-B824-11D6-BD53-000393556882@ontologicon.com>

All, below please find the concluded version of the questionnaire, 
having heard no objections/comments to previous postings.

Dom/Lofton, please add the relevant pointer to the right document 
(inlined with @DD).




The QA WG has repeatedly discussed the current practices and use of 
structured/granular grammars (such as XML Schema/DTD or XHTML using a 
div/class mechanism to provide references and structure) in authoring 
W3C specifications. The discussion has mainly been about:
	- The possibility of using structured grammars to represent, more 
clearly than done today, what the specification actually specifies
	- The possibility to use common (sub)sets in order to streamline 
W3C specification authoring
	- The possibility to extract relevant information from the 
specification itself, minimizing the need to interpret the text

You can find further information on the rationale behind these thought 
in (@DD: forgotten link, on vacation on a very sloppy phone line, so 
cannot find pointer to relevant doc. Please assist).

The results of this "voting" will be published to the participants, the 
QA WG editor responsible for the topic, and the W3C chairs.

It is estimated that the procedure takes no longer than 5 minutes to 
conclude, and we would like to urge participants to fill it in, as it 
will greatly enhance the accuracy of the voting as well as provide 
necessary information needed to evaluate current practices and needs 
within the W3C. Please mark the answer which best fits your WG, and give 
a text description where needed.

1. In authoring your specifications, do you use (1 choice) as format for 
_authoring_ (not publishing):
[] XML Spec or variety thereof
[] (X)HTML + div using classes to identify particular content and 

2. If you're not using XML Spec, are you using any other grammar or 
agreed on content strucure? If so, please indicate which.
[] Yes (please indicate)
[] No, but group has considered it
[] No

3. If you're using XML Spec, is it the current one, or a modified 
[] Plain
[] Modified
If modified, please indicate the nature and rationale of the change. []
4. How do you produce your published specifications?
[] Lead editor assembles document editor parts from the editors, 
producing a master document
[] Submit parts of document, producing the master document via script or 
similar solution
[] Other (please indicate) []

5. How big a part of the editor's workload is it to stay close to a 
particular markup, if used, during the ongoing effort?
[] Less than 5%
[] 5-10%
[] 10-20%
[] More than 20%
[] Please indicate the amount of hours it takes to overcome the startup 
phase, ie. how long it (generally) takes for editors to start using the 
content structured agreed on by the WG (hours).
Received on Sunday, 25 August 2002 08:15:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:31 UTC