Re: Draft Minutes of Wednesday, 8 January F2F Afternoon

At 06:56 PM 1/17/03 +0100, Dimitris Dimitriadis wrote:
>[...]My only problem is that I don't think I correctly understand the 
>concept of templates. If explained to me, maybe we can work around it 
>smoothly.

I'm not sure that I do either.  Seattle minutes:

>LR ­ Should the tools reside in QAWG?  Should TTF develop templates to
>facilitate tool development?  Do we envision TTF building things?
>Dd ­ We should not do maintenance.  Don’t know about templates.
>LR ­ Charter should allow us to optionally develop tools to help WGs build 
>test
>materials or to help WGs conform to our documents.
>Consensus ­ It’s desirable for TTF to build tools, resources allowing.
>MM ­ Even a “how to” will help.
>Dd ­ We shouldn’t be “out source” for building tests.
>Consensus ­ New bullet ­ develop tools, templates and tool kits of general
>usefulness to help WGs develop test materials.

If someone wants to define templates for Dimitris, please do.

But IMO, the key point is the generality.  With "tools, toolkits, and 
templates" we are collectively saying:  we're not going to build peoples 
test suites, but we're going to try to supply some generally useful stuff 
that lots of WGs can use to help and expedite the building of  their test 
suites.

I guess I think of a template as one possible component of a toolkit.  For 
example, one could take the XSLT design for test-case catalogue instance 
and quickly derive an XML template, starting with which a specific WG could 
quickly design a Test Case Description Language specific to their TS.  This 
would be a TCDL template.

In the context of OpsGL, a template might be a skeletonized QA Process 
Document -- the WG fills in the specifics in the skeleton/template, and 
their QAPD is done.

-Lfton.

Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 13:13:46 UTC