- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 19:16:56 -0400
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, www-qa-wg@w3.org
Hi Lofton,
thanks for the Agenda and the schedule of Publication,
At 9:07 -0600 2002-09-16, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>3.) OpsET & SpecET -- uncertain, possibly slip a little and publish
>after the GL parts.
>
>"Techniques will raise a number of additional issues: must (can) the
>enumeration be exhaustive? how precise (i.e., verifiable) can these
>be in diverse operational, specification, and test environments?"
>
>Lurking here also is the question (issue): What role, if any, do
>the techniques in the ET parts play in the determination of
>conformance to the specific requirements of the GL parts?
Do you want a new version of the SpecGL Examples and Techniques
before Tokyo F2F? I can work on that. And I think it could clarify
some bits :)
I have maybe things to add the agenda of Wednesday.
- Language and Clarity in our QA Specifications. I will explain
wednesday what I mean, and what we can do about it. A few bits now:
I have asked for a review to someone inside W3C Team of the
Spec Guideline who will be a virgin reader (only a few knowledge of
W3C WG life), I asked for a harsh review.
- Publication calendar was one of my request to have a table on the
QA Website with the planned dates of publication.
--
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
http://www.w3.org/QA/
--- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Monday, 16 September 2002 19:35:00 UTC