- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:37:00 -0400
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <F6023F09-EBE6-11D8-9188-000A95718F82@w3.org>
Hi QA WG, We need to define the conformance section of SpecGL itself, In http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2004/07/WD-qaframe-spec/#conformance-clause """ A.1. A conformance clause is essential With a good conformance clause, a specification comes close to full conformance to this Specification Guidelines. """ This means that, SpecGL has a strict conformance clause imposing things on the way you can apply or comply to these guidelines. I'm not sure this sentence will have the be kept, it depends on the model we will choose. * I have also noticed that we may need markers on each Good Practice and Principle to be able to identify them easily, in reliable way, and to help the usability of the document. (btw, I have to fix something which is not completely correct for the semantics of the document. GP/Principle prose should be in a heading, I think. I will see how I can deal with that.) It could be something ala ===================== + A. Specifying Conformance - A.1. A conformance clause is essential A1-P1 Principle: Include a conformance clause. A1-GP1 Good Practice: Define the specification conformance model in the conformance clause A1-GP2 Good Practice: Specify in the conformance clause how to distinguish normative from informative content. - A.2 Specify how to make conformance claims A2-GP1 Good Practice: Provide the wording for conformance claims. A2-GP2 Good Practice: Provide an Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS) proforma. A2-GP3 Good Practice: Require an Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS) as part of valid conformance claims. ===================== As I said in a previous email, Techniques are a good set of test cases. Though we can't claim that they are the unique way to achieve the conformance to SpecGL. I would say that GP and Principles are Test Assertions and techniques are derived test cases, which means that people can come with more or different test cases as long as it fulfills the “requirements” of SpecGL. Do we have minimal requirements for a specification, that we will say: This has to be!!! (like conformance section ;) ) It would be simpler if we say: Principles are mandatory and Good Practices optional, if you think it's possible, I'll go for it. This is a quick start to modify, erase, improve, etc. Conformance to this document There is no such thing as being conformant to Specification Guidelines. Though the document is organized as a set of principles and good practices. This set defines test assertions for this document and techniques are possible test cases for the implementation of these test assertions. [@@something about "could be as a conformance requirement" prose here?@@] -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Wednesday, 11 August 2004 22:37:02 UTC