- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:01:37 +0100
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1075280497.9501.347.camel@stratustier>
Le mer 28/01/2004 à 00:03, Lofton Henderson a écrit : > Thanks, it looks good. A few small comments, mostly about the introductory > paragraph... > By when would we like them to reply? (Proposal: "by 27 February, if > possible") Added (FWIW, if we use WBS, we get to specify the date of end of review in a more prominent place, too). > 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?) www-qa-wg@w3.org sounds good to me, but... > Is there any issue here about public/member-only information? There might be, indeed. If we don't use WBS, maybe I'll ask them to send their review to dom@w3.org, cc w3c-archive@w3.org? > Do we want to promise any sort of summary or consolidation of the > replies? (As we did with our document technologies survey.) I don't think we need to promise it; but I think we should make one. > >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? I think this is too detailed, since it will be understood by too few people. I expect that if people have developed such a language, they are likely to point us to it at some point in their questionnaire. > >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? I think it would be useful, but I haven't found a way to formulate it in a way that I thought would be understandable by enough people; do you have a proposal? Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2004 04:01:41 UTC