- From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
- Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 13:01:18 -0500
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20041209125322.01c80730@wsxg03.nist.gov>
Below is my assignment for Ruby. They satisfy all but 2 Requirements - 3.2A consistent style for conformance requirements and explain how to distinguish them 4.3A Address extensibility Both are easily remedied by adding simple statements. Although they have a Scope (2.1A), they could do better by having it more easily found. I also reviewed the Good Practices. With respect to deprecation - if is difficult for a reviewer who is not a member of the WG to determine. Specifically, if there are no deprecated items, a reviewer of the specification (e.g., us), don't know if they left it out or didn't have any. However, since the authors of the specification know the answer, and they are the primary audience of SpecGL, do we need to do anything? Also, GP 3.1D - use terms already defined without changing their definitions - is difficult for a reviewer to know. And, GP 5 A and B - is also difficult for a reviewer, not part of the WG, to answer. +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Ruby Annotation <http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-ruby-20010531/>http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-ruby-20010531/ 1.1.A: Include a conformance clause. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#include->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#include- conformance-clause-principle YES 2.1.A: Define the scope. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-scope->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-scope- principle YES, but not as a separate, identifiable section, embedded into section 1.1 is a paragraph that would serve as the Scope. 2.2.A: Identify who or what will implement the specification. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#implement-principle>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#implement-principle YES 2.3.A: Make a list of normative references. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ref-norm-principle>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ref-norm-principle YES 3.1.A: Define the terms used in the normative parts of the specification. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-terms->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-terms- principle YES 3.1.B: Create conformance labels for each part of the conformance model. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conf-label-principle>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conf-label-principle YES 3.2.A: Use a consistent style for conformance requirements and explain how to distinguish them. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#consistent-style->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#consistent-style- principle NO. Requirements are in a section labeled as normative, and are indicated by descriptive prose. To meet this requirement (3.2A), a statement in the conformance clause indicating that conformance requirements are indicated by a descriptive style. 3.2.B: Indicate which conformance requirements are mandatory, which are recommended and which are optional. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#req-opt-conf->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#req-opt-conf- principle YES. From reading the text, it was clear what was required, optional (choice), etc. 4.1.B: If the technology is subdivided, then indicate which subdivisions are mandatory for conformance. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdivide->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdivide- mandatory-principle YES. 4.1.C: If the technology is subdivided, then address subdivision constraints. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdiv-constraints->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdiv-constraints- principle YES 4.3.A: Address Extensibility. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#likehood-extension->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#likehood-extension- principle NO. To satisfy this requirement (4.3A), add a statement regarding extensions – allowed or not allowed. 4.4.A: Identify deprecated features. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#deprecated-feature->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#deprecated-feature- principle Not Applicable – no deprecated features 4.4.B: Define how deprecated feature is handled by each class of product. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#degree-support->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#degree-support- principle Not Applicable ===================================== * 25 Good Practices (Not normative) * ===================================== 1.1.B: Define the specification's conformance model in the conformance clause. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conformance-model-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conformance-model-gp YES 1.1.C: Specify in the conformance clause how to distinguish normative from informative content. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#norm-informative-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#norm-informative-gp NO 1.2.A: Provide the wording for conformance claims. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conformance-claim-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#conformance-claim-gp NO – maybe Not Applicable 1.2.B: Provide an Implementation Conformance Statement proforma. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ics-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ics-gp NO 1.2.C: Require an Implementation Conformance Statement as part of valid conformance claims. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ics-claim-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ics-claim-gp NO 2.1.B: Provide examples, use cases, and graphics. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#use-example-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#use-example-gp YES 2.3.B: Do systematic reviews of normative references and their implications. <http://w3c.test.site/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ref-define->http://w3c.test.site/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#ref-define- practice Don’t know 3.1.C: Define the unfamiliar terms in-line, and consolidate the definitions in a glossary section. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-terms->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-terms- inline-gp YES 3.1.D: Use terms already defined without changing their definition. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#reuse-terms-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#reuse-terms-gp Don’t know 4.1.A: Create subdivisions of the technology when warranted. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdivide-foster-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#subdivide-foster-gp YES 4.1.D: If the technology is profiled, define rules for creating new profiles. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#rules-profiles-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#rules-profiles-gp Not Applicable 4.2.A: Make sure there is a need for the optional feature. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#need-option-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#need-option-gp YES 4.2.B: Clearly identify optional features. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#label-options-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#label-options-gp YES 4.2.C: Indicate any limitations or constraints on optional features. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#constraints-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#constraints-gp YES 4.3.B: If extensibility is allowed, define an extension mechanism. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#extensions->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#extensions- prohibited-gp NO – not addressed 4.3.C: Warn implementers to create extensions that do not interfere with conformance. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#breaking->http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#breaking- conformance-gp NO 4.3.D: Define error handling for unknown extensions. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-error-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#define-error-gp NO 4.4.C: Explain how to avoid using a deprecated feature. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#workaround-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#workaround-gp Not Applicable – no deprecated features 4.4.D: Identify obsolete features. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#obsolete-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#obsolete-gp Not Applicable: no obsolete features 4.5.A: Define an error handling mechanism. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#error-handling-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#error-handling-gp YES 5.A: Define an internal publication and review process. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#practice-principle>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#practice-principle Don't know 5.B: Do a systematic and thorough review. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#review-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#review-gp NO – don’t know. 5.C: Write sample code or tests. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#write-sample-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#write-sample-gp YES – there is sample code 5.D: Write Test Assertions. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#write-assertion-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#write-assertion-gp NO 5.E: Use formal languages and define which from prose and formal languages has priority. <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#formal-language-gp>http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#formal-language-gp NO
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2004 18:03:22 UTC