- 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