Re: DRAFT minutes, QA Working Group Teleconference 2003-02-18

ATTN "All" -- Note date correction, on the AIs assigned to "All"...

At 05:04 PM 2/19/03 -0800, Kirill Gavrylyuk wrote:

>Summary of New Action Items: [ be filled in after telcon...]
>AI-20030218-1  All: Send to PC examples that illustrate the QA work in the 
>WG. Prior to Monday Feb 24th.
>AI-20030218-2  KG: Send to PC a rough estimate of SOAP 1.2 spec + 
>implementation development cost. Prior to Monday Feb 24th.
>AI-20030218-3  KD: To resend an invite to people (selected chairs/staff 
>contacts) to review the QA Framework together with QA WG. Wednesday Feb 19th.
>AI-20030218-4  All: Follow up on PC's email with suggestions/ideas for 
>Boston outreach. Prior to Monday Feb 24th.

For -1 and -4, at least, please try to send comments/contributions before 
the end of Friday, Feb 21st.  Otherwise Patrick will not have time to 
integrate into a new draft for Monday.

(-2 is a detail that we can incorporate at any point, but -1 and -4 affect 
the basic outline and content of the kit.)

QUESTION.  Can someone remind me, what exactly are we looking for in 
"-1".  Are these just little illustrations of points in the slides, that we 
can link from the text of the slides themselves?  Sort of like the new 
proposed bullet in the Operational slide:  "MAKE IT EASY -- use OpsGL's 
@@charter template@@ and @@process template@@"?  Or were we talking about 
something else?

>DD: Working on the interoperable standards is an overall saving. You 
>already work on the interoperable standard, and testing allows you to add 
>to this saving even more.
>PC: Aren't we missing the argument that testing may save the cost of specs 
>DD: We could present a case study: 3 to 4 bullets list showing on each 
>level practical gain by undertaking QA proposed way. Present immediate 
>gains from following the particular guidelines.
>PC: Anyone would like to volunteer to do a case study by Monday?
>LH: how about just put a slide with references

Just to be clear, this was being pragmatic.  I think Dimitris' idea is a 
good one, but I'm worried that we don't have the time to properly develop 
it before Boston.

We shouldn't let it drop.  Let's get an action item on someone, with a date.


Received on Thursday, 20 February 2003 13:08:43 UTC