W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > February 2004

Re: f2f draft agenda posted

From: Mark Skall <mark.skall@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 13:36:32 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

>There is no time for SpecGL issues resolution on the f2f agenda.  (And I 
>wasn't anticipating that time would be spent on detailed SpecGL 
>issues.)  Recent time on SpecGL was about the TA stuff, which has been in 
>the queue since before CR publication (because SpecGL fails to comply with 
>itself, for which we have gotten roasted by others).
>Unless I'm forgetting something, we haven't spent any time recently 
>processing SpecGL comments or issues, have we?

I wasn't talking about time spent on SpecGL at the upcoming meeting or even 
recently.  My only point is that SpecGL was thought out and very well 
discussed at its comparable point in the life cycle to TestGL.  As an 
example, we spent more time on one aspect of SpecGL (endless DOV 
discussions) than on all of TestGL.

In order to have a comprehensive, well-thought out document we need to vet 
as many issues as possible for TestGL.

I'm not arguing with the need to determine QAF Future and the big 
issues.  That clearly needs to be done, and very soon.  I'd like to see, 
however, testGL move up in the pecking order after that - if not at the 
f2f, then I think we should spend more time at telcons discussing TestGL.

My 2 cents.


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 Friday, 27 February 2004 13:36:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:35 UTC