[SpecGL Draft] Provide an ICS and Require ICS part of the claim


I have noticed that I have forgotten two GPs for review. So I put them 
in the specification and I have filled an issue item so we don't forget 
to review them after publication. I put them here for record.

The first one

Good Practice:
  Provide an Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS) proforma.

What does it mean?
An Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS) provides standardized 
information about the conformance of an implementation to the 
specification. It indicates which capabillities and options have been 
implemented, as well as the limitations of the implementation. An ICS 
typically takes the form of a questionnaire for implementor to 

This Good Practice suggests that the specification itself include an 
ICS proforma. (Caveat. The ICS concept may be inapplicable to some 
types of specifications.)

Why care?
An ICS provides detail about conformance. The detail can, for example, 
be used to identify the subset of a conformance test suite that is 
applicable to the implementation to be tested. An ICS can also be 
especially valuable in optionality choices in the implementation, and 
documenting the presence of extensions.

	Optionality, see section D.2

* Make a list of all requirements a developer has to met to implement 
the specification
* Identify with precision in the ICS which specification is  addressed 
(dated URI, title, date, status)
* Link from the ICS, each requirement to the appropriate section of the 
* Give the possibility for the developer to check if the criteria has 
been met (a form, a table)

QA Specification Guidelines provides an ICS [QA-SPEC-ICS] to help 
developers to verify the conformance to this document. Good practices 
(informative) and Principles (normative), organized following the 
sections of the document, are given in a table where developers can 
check yes, no or not applicable.

Second GP

Good Practice:
Require an Implementation Conformance Statement (ICS) as part of valid 
conformance claims.

What does it mean?
This simply puts together the previous two good practices. Not only 
could the specification provide an ICS proforma for implementors, but 
it could require it to be linked from its standardized conformance 
claim template.

Why care?
Providing a filled ICS with the conformance claim might help customers 
and users to verify easily the level of support of individual 
requirements of the specifications. It also strengthens the value of 
the claim.

	See “Provide the wording for conformance claims” in section A.2

* Explain in the conformance claim section how the developer must fill 
the ICS
* Give precise instruction how the ICS must be part of the conformance 
claim. It might be an external document, it might a link to precise 
dated document, etc.


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

Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2004 22:24:22 UTC