Re: [QA Ops] QA CR and WG charters

I agree - this is an excellent suggestion...

Mark Skall wrote:

>
> At 09:17 AM 9/17/2003 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 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.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>> Suggestions?
>>
>> -- 
>> 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 17:26:44 UTC