Use Cases revised


Here is a revision of the OpsGL use cases, plus the new 5th case, following 
suggestions from yesterday's telecon.  Comments welcome.  In particular, 
are they sufficiently tightened up (i.e., enough of the excessive detail 


===== start use case subsection =====

1.11. Use cases

The following scenarios illustrate typical uses of Operational Guidelines:

     * A new Working Group is just drafting its Charter. The 
Charter-drafting team, including prospective WG members, consults the QA 
Framework: Introduction. Appreciating the payback of early quality 
commitment and integration, the team refers to Operational Guidelines. 
Guided by the checkpoints of the charter-phase guidelines, and using the 
provided Charter Template, the WG writes its quality level and test 
materials commitments into its draft Charter.
     * An existing Working Group has just finished writing its Requirements 
and Use Cases documents, and is beginning to draft its specification. 
Concurrently, it is starting to discuss test suite (TS) plans. Consulting 
Operational Guidelines, it jump starts the TS project by appointing a QA 
Moderator and a part-time TS team, and quickly produces a first version of 
its QA Process Document (QAPD) using the provided QAPD template.
     * A Working Group has been re-chartered to finish a Second Edition 
(maintenance release) of its specification, and to develop the next 
functional version, 2.0. The group did not develop a test suite (TS) during 
its first charter, but a collaboration of outside organizations and an 
industry consortium has developed one. The WG and developers have agreed in 
concept to transfer it to a stable home in W3C. Operational Guidelines is 
consulted for a detailing of preliminary steps, requirements, and specific 
activities involved in making a smooth and trouble-free transfer.
     * A Working Group is almost ready to request Candidate Recommendation 
(CR), and has met its goal of having a comprehensive test suite (TS) ready 
for the trial implementation period of CR. Looking at making the TS 
publicly available, it uncovers numerous unanticipated procedural issues 
about TS publication. The issue of the right TS distribution licenses is 
proving particularly hard. Consulting Operational Guidelines, the WG finds 
discussion of the pros and cons of the W3C Software License and the 
Document License, as well as guidance on resolving an optimal licensing 
strategy .
     * A Working Group has finished building a basic test suite (TS) for 
its specification, and is nearly finished with plans for the first release 
of its basic TS. After the release, it wants to take advantage of the large 
test collections of several early implementors, and start accepting 
contributions. Rather than figure out the issues and write a Test 
Contribution & Review process from scratch, it takes guidance from 
Operational Guidelines, and uses the examples and templates of Operational 
Examples &Techniques to significantly shorten the development of its 
contribution process.
===== end =====

Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2003 17:36:44 UTC