- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 11:22:28 -0700
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
QAWG -- Monday's topic will be: first look at how to handle comments from Jeremy Carroll and/or OWL. There is a *lot* of material. Therefore I am sending a bibliography now. Please try to familiarize yourself with the material before Monday, if you haven't already read it thoroughly. I will try to send an identification and summary of the issues that we need to address, before the weekend (hopefully). [1] - [3] deal with procedural objections to how QA has progressed the QAF. [4] are personal comments about QAF, from JC to QA, requesting formal response. [5] are consensus WG comments from OWL to QA, requiring formal response. [6] & [7] are additional references (uncertain about response requirements). [1] "Objection to QA Framework" ===== thread starting with JC objection and continuing with KD&DH rebuttals -- about whether we are contravening W3M decisions, and following proper W3C procedures. Thread starts at: [1a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0014.html [JC] [1b] ...switched to qa-chairs, text will be made available to QAWG on 1/23... [2] "Objection to not formally addressing comment" ===== thread wherein JC objects to our lack of formal response to some comments he made in July on www-qa (which themselves resulted in signficant QAWG/public discussion thread). KD replies/rebuts. Start at: [2a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0016.html [3] "Objection to not listing open issues when advancing to CR" ===== thread wherein JC objects to not listing his TestGL concerns as open issues when advancing OpsGL and SpecGL to CR, and objects to progressing the 3 parts at different pace. KD replies. Start at: [3a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0017.html [4] "Personal review of QAF" ===== contribution from JC, w/ a review of the three parts of QAF, requesting formal consideration and reply. Message and document are at: [4a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0002.html [4b] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Jan/att-0000/ [5] "OWL WG comments on QA Documents" ===== contribution from OWL, official WG position on QAF. Message containing comments is at: [5a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0001.html [6] "Web Ontology Working Group - Response to "call for implementat" ===== contribution from OWL, their case study of applying OpsGL to their WG. Background for [5] (undetermined yet, whether its contents require formal reply). [6a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2004Jan/0000.html [7] "RDF Core test driven development and QA Test Doc" ===== thread started by JC about TestGL, about whether it requires waterfall and prohibits XP (test-driven dev't). Discussed last week (14-jan telecon). Start at: [7a] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jan/0000.html Regards, -Lofton.
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2004 13:21:01 UTC