W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > September 2003

Re: [QA Ops] QA CR and WG charters

From: Mark Skall <mark.skall@nist.gov>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:44:55 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, www-qa-wg@w3.org

At 09:17 AM 9/17/2003 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:

>A comment has been made by the OWL WG, which raises a fair enough point. 
>If they try to implement the QA Ops GL, they may have to modify their 
>charter to comply with the checkpoints:
>         CP 1.1 Where it's explained in the Examples and Techniques. Amend 
> a charter for an existing WG.
>         CP 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 too.
>- What's happening if they modify their charter to try the QA Framework 
>Ops GL and notice later on, that the CP has disappeared.
>- What's happening if they notice that they will engage themselves in a 
>process they don't want now.
>- Is there room for a thought experience during our CR phase. So WG trying 
>to do like if they were making it real, but not really. For example write 
>a mockup charter, like if they had to comply and report what are the problems.

I agree with this suggestion.  It would be a terrible burden to really make 
significant changes that could later be obviated by changes to our 
drafts.  I wholeheartedly endorse the idea of WGs providing a mockup to 
meet our requirements, without making actual changes.


>Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
>W3C Conformance Manager
>*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Mark Skall
Chief, Software Diagnostics and Conformance Testing Division
Information Technology Laboratory
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8970
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8970

Voice: 301-975-3262
Fax:   301-590-9174
Email: skall@nist.gov
Received on Wednesday, 17 September 2003 16:45:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:34 UTC