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

Issue priority for FPWD

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:37:40 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
dThere are 33 open issues in the 2001-01-02 Issues List.  2/3 are called 
"Substantive", 1/3 are "Editorial".  Some should definitely be addressed 
before moving to FPWD, some should be postponed (unless we want FPWD to be 
in 2003!).

You should assume that all WCAG and other pubrules stuff will be taken care 
of, and all the simple "@@" editorial and link-completion stuff will be 
done by the editors (although please continue to point out such items!).

Here is a suggested prioritization, from the Framework editors.  The 
numbers refer to the Issue numbers in 
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qawg-issues-html.html#summaryList, which in turn 
are hyperlinked to the "full" issue description (some are not so full).

I) Critical:

#26.  Even if it is very brief, we *must* have a Conformance Clause (we're 
QA, right?!)

II) Important -- we at least need to all be aware what the FPWD drafts are 
saying here:
#32, #23, #33, #34, #38, #18, #22, #9.

III) Useful to discuss if there is time:
#24, #28, #29, #27, #30, #40, #17, #20

This is not to suggest that the issues in (III) are not 
significant.  Rather, they are more "tactical" than overall "strategic" -- 
they can be sorted out during public comment.  Similarly, issues that 
aren't mentioned above may be very significant, but are not perceived to be 
on the critical path to FPWD.

(for the editors)

Lofton Henderson
1919 Fourteenth St., #604
Boulder, CO   80302

Phone:  303-449-8728
Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2002 17:35:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:29 UTC