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

Re: Updated version of the test survey (AI-20040126-1 done)

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:03:18 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org


Thanks, it looks good.  A few small comments, mostly about the introductory 

At 11:38 AM 1/27/04 +0100, Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux wrote:
>survey starts here
>The QA Working Group is working on gathering experiences of Test
>development, so as to better match its deliverables with other Working
>Groups needs and expectations. We would appreciate if you could take
>the time to answer to the following questions; if some of these are not
>applicable to your situation, please let us know why. If any of these
>questions is unclear for you, do not hesitate to contact dom@w3.org to
>get more details.

By when would we like them to reply?  (Proposal:  "by 27 February, if 

To where would we like them to reply?  (Options:  to QAWG list; to QAIG 
list.  I don't have a strong preference.  I tend to think QAWG.  Does 
anyone think that the raw replies, in themselves, would be of any interest 
to the IG?)

Is there any issue here about public/member-only information?

Do we want to promise any sort of summary or consolidation of the 
replies?  (As we did with our document technologies survey.)

Two more comments embedded...

>1) Name of the WG Specifications for which you have developed or are
>developing Test Materials (if you have not developed test materials yet,
>you can answer the questions following the way you plan to do so)
>2) Describe the relationships between the specifications development
>and the test material developments (e.g. Test Suite built during CR,
>or test cases developed along each feature in the spec, ...)?
>3) What process do you follow to develop your test materials? e.g. how
>are new test cases developed, approved, ... (if the process is described
>somewhere on the Web, please give us its URI)
>4) Describe the information typically associated with a test case in
>your test suite (e.g. name, status, link to specification, ...)

Do we want to know anything about how they express the information and/or 
associated it with the test cases?  (I.e., a TCDL).  Or do you think this 
is too detailed?

>5) What is the intended coverage of your test suite? (e.g. "each feature
>is tested" or "only difficult features are tested","features at risk
>are tested", ...)
>6) What parts of your test suite(s) are automated (if any)? Did you use
>existing tools to provide this automation or did you develop new ones?

Do we want to ask about test results reporting, either as part of this 
question or a separate question?  Or do you think this is too detailed?

>7) What is (are)  the most challenging aspect(s) you encounter in the
>development of the test materials?
>8) What benefits (if any) did the Working Group get from the development
>of these test materials?
>9) Any other input you would like to share about your experiences on
>these topics.

Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2004 18:00:59 UTC

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