- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 10:00:40 -0700
- To: lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
Lynne, Thanks for the careful look at P&O. We'll discuss this during the "Framework documents" segment of the agenda [3] for Friday. We also have the previous contributions of yours, [1] and [2]. QAWG attendees, please have a look at these. There hasn't been any pushback yet, so let's endorse and integrate (or debate and modify). -Lofton. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2002Jan/0036.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2002Jan/0134.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2002Feb/0018.html At 11:15 AM 2/27/2002 -0500, lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov wrote: >I just realized that what I proposed for Guide 4 is basically Guide 6. Sorry >about that. However, I still recommend that Guide 4 be modified - perhaps >making it more specific to staffing. > >Perhaps - Guide: Allocate staff for QA > >lynne > >----- Forwarded message from lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov ----- >Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:45:57 -0500 (EST) >From: lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov >Reply-To: lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov >Subject: Comment on Fmwk:P&O, guideline 4 >To: www-qa-wg@w3.org > >Suggestion for rewriting Guideline 4. > >Rationale. The current Guideline 4 introduces the notion of QA process, but >there is no discussion of what the QA process is. The Checkpoints identify >only 1 aspect of what needs to be done - staffing. A QA process should include >much more regarding the functions and responsibilities, procedures, >communications, etc. Since I don't see this covered elsewhere, I propose the >following for consideration. > >Guideline 4. Establish the QA Process >QA process describes the responsibilities and functions needed to enable >the WG > >to produce QA materials. The process should ensure that the work is >accomplished in an open, consensus-based manner. It should address the >procedural issues, communication channels, and structure and staffing. > >Checkpoint 1: develop a QA Process document [P1] >Checkpoint 2: Designate a QA subgroup or task force >Checkpoint 3: Appoint a QA moderator >Checkpoint 4. Provide communication mechanism(s) >Checkpoint 5. Allow contributions >Checkpoint 6. define criteria for reviewing and evaluating contributions >Checkpoint 7: define versioning of test materials > > >--lynne > >----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2002 04:04:10 UTC