- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: 30 Jan 2003 14:57:17 +0100
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1043935039.5836.14.camel@stratustier>
Le mer 29/01/2003 à 19:41, Lofton Henderson a écrit : > I have these minor comments: > > 1.) "Implementation Conformance Statement" does not appear anywhere in the > ICS document itself. Should it? The SpecGL text says this in reference to > its checklist: "The latter is an Implementation Conformance Statement > (ICS) pro-forma for this specification. (See GL12.)" Should something > like this appear in the priority-sort checklist also? "This is an...(ICS)..." Err, I think it does in the introduction: http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/01/qaframe-spec/qaframe-spec-ics#introduction " The checkpoints are presented by order of their priorities, which makes it an appropriate Implementation Conformance Statement for the guidelines. " > 2.) Before each table is a statement like, "To be A-conformant with the > guidelines, the following checkpoints must be fulfilled:" I suggest adding > a mention of priority, e.g., "To be A-conformant with the guidelines, all > of the Priority 1 checkpoints must be fulfilled:" > Hmmm... I just noticed that before the 2nd table it says, "To be > AA-conformant with the guidelines, the following checkpoints must be > fulfilled:". Which is slightly misleading (because P1 must also be > satisfied). Should say, "To be AA-conformant with the guidelines, all of > the Priority 2 checkpoints must be fulfilled (in addition to the above > Priority 1 checkpoints):" Similarly for 3rd table. I've integrated that both in the XSLT and in the live ICS (that doesn't show right now due to a mirroring problem). Thanks, Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 30 January 2003 08:57:22 UTC