Re: [DRAFT] F2F QA meeting 1st March.

Howdy,

>You ask:  (NOTE: Should I include the urls?, these sites seem public as
>will be the email... is that a concern? I
>have the various uri's if they are required.)  I think "yes", unless
>someone objects due to "public" (I don't see any problem with that).

Ok, here's the info for the minutes.
The template tools for publishing documents to WG or TR space can be found at
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/,tools for WG space or
http://www.w3.org/QA/TR/,tools for TR space.
This gives a complete listing of the availible tools.
Of special mention are
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/,new for a new document,
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/,checklink to check the links in a document and
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/,validate to validate the document.
Just substitute TR for WG if you want a TR document.

Peter


At 11:01 AM -0800 3/13/02, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>Hi Karl,
>
>MInutes look good, here are a few small changes:
>
>"CSS was unaware of the QA activity."  Please change to "..unaware of QA
>resources like The Matrix."
>
>Typo, change "FPWG" to "FPWD".
>
>Typos, change "Rosenthalís" to "Rosenthal's", "Lynneís" to "Lynne's" (3
>times), and "Karillís" to "Kirill's" (seems to be a problem with "'" in
>this paragraph).
>
>You ask:  (NOTE: Should I include the urls?, these sites seem public as
>will be the email... is that a concern? I
>have the various uri's if they are required.)  I think "yes", unless
>someone objects due to "public" (I don't see any problem with that).
>
>"a new page for WG members" -- should that be "new page for new WG members"?
>
>That's all,
>-Lofotn.

Received on Thursday, 14 March 2002 13:00:06 UTC