Tuesday morning minutes

QA Working Group F2F Minutes
Monday, 15-June-2004
Scribe: Mark Skall

(PC) Patrick Curran (Sun Microsystems)
(KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, WG co-chair)
(DH) Dominique HazaŽl-Massieux (W3C)
(LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO - WG co-chair)
(LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST - IG co-chair)
(MS) Mark Skall (NIST)


(DD) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon)
(AT) Andrew Thackrah (Open Group)
(VV) Vanitha Venkatraman (Sun Microsystems)


Summary of New Action Items:

AI-20040615-1  For QA Handbook, each WG member will review a section for 
clarity of content, typos, etc. (Intro and Roadmap  Lynne, Early planning 
and commitment  Mark, Day to Day  Patrick, Licensing and Branding  Dom, 
Acquiring Test Materials  Karl.)  by June 30.

AI-20040615-2  LH will make list of needed examples, put anchors in and 
solicit examples from Chairs and IG, for QA Handbook by June 18.

AI-20040615-3 DH will put TestGL into Wiki by June 25.


Previous Telcon Minutes:

o       (9:00) Should QAWG continue as a WG (1 hr)

Summary:  QAWG members looked at pros and cons of keeping the QAWG together 
vs. discontinuing the group and working solely as an IG.  The consensus is 
that the work would have much less clout if the WG went away.  The group 
decided to continue the WG, at least through October, and get documents to 
last call.  We will reduce the telcons from once a week to once every two 

LR  We should decide, as a Group, our future.  This was discussed at the AC 
meeting.  People want us to stay but no mention of how to support us.
KD  Perhaps we’re not perceived as useful to WGs.
MS  Disagree.  Vast majority of people support our work.
KD  Majority just want to know how to fulfill criteria that would allow 
them to pass.
LR  What does W3M think?
DH  Although W3C is providing a lot of resources there is no pressure to 
close.  However, members are not committing resources.  Co-chair may not be 
continuing.  There has been a decrease in activity lately.
KD  Can we continue through the IG?
MS  We’re in a position of more strength if we continue as a WG.
LH  If we continued with IG we would not have to continue with some processes.
MS  However, the perception would be that we’re not achieving consensus.
MS  Are you recommending continuing as an IG rather than a WG?
LH  We need to either reduce scope or continue as an IG.
PC  I may have to reduce my effort or withdraw.
MS  Can we send invitation letters to people asking them to join?
KD  We’ve done that in the past without success.
LR  Perhaps we can target people to review drafts.
KD  We can show W3M how other people, outside of QA WG, have participated.
PC  It would be very difficult to recruit people if we don’t have a WG.
MS  W3C is very interested in quality, testing and precise recs.  It would 
be a bad sign to discontinue.
LH  Has anyone discussed merging QA with other groups, like accessibility?
DH  This won’t solve the problem.
PC  It would be a shame if WG went away.  There is value in having such an 
organization.  However, we haven’t delivered anything that would make their 
life easier.
MS  That shouldn’t be our goal.  We may not make other members’ life 
easier.  However, the quality of specs, tests and implementations will be 
improved, thus helping everybody.
DH  If we continue, how will we proceed without a co-chair?
LR  What takes the time?
LH  Issue processing and preparing for meetings.
MS  If we switched to every other week telcons, it would reduce 
administrative effort.
KD  Reviews of documents take a lot of time as do editing of web pages.
PC  What if we didn’t aim the documents at rec track?   Would that 
significantly reduce the effort?
LR  It would but it would reduce impact.
DH  The plan is to continue WG through October.
LH  WG should allow documents to go through at least 2 more cycles.
DH  Should go through last call of QAH and SpecGL.
LR  If co-chair goes away, we need someone to do the issues list.
LR  Will help sort out issues.
LH  Who will be responsible that all replies are done and doesn’t slip 
through the cracks?
KD  I will do this.

o        (10:15) Status and future of QA Framework documents (1 hr)
ß       what is the best way to proceed on all the QAF documents

Summary:  All three documents being processed by the QA WG were 
discussed.  It was decided to continue the work on QA Handbook and SpecGL 
and to discontinue the formal work on TestGL until the other documents are 
complete.  However, the QAWG will informally continue work on TestGL 
through the Wiki.

LR  First let’s go over the status of the handbook and decide what to do next.
LH  QAH is in pretty good shape, with a uniform level of 
maturity.  Examples are missing.  Templates need work  will get 
done.  Sections 3.2 and 3.3 are related to TestGL.  I will continue to work 
on document.
LR  We should all try to provide some examples.
LH  I will make a list of all the examples I need.
LR  Can we send that to IG and Chairs?
LH  Yes.
LR  Will this be a note?
DH  Yes.  A WG note.
LR  Everyone endorses this and wants to see this finished.
LR  Each of us should review a section for clarity of content, typos, etc.
LR  Assignments: Intro and Roadmap  Lynne, Early planning and 
commitment  Mark, Day to Day  Patrick, Licensing and Branding  Dom, 
Acquiring Test Materials  Karl.
LH  I will make list of needed examples, put anchors in and solicit 
examples from Chairs and IG.
LR  SpecGL  lots of holes in document.  Kark has a procedure as to how to 
KD  Document is enjoyable to read.
LR  TestGL.  What should we do with it?  Needs more attention.  Should we 
put it on the back burner?
PC  Unlikely to have time to work on it.  Perhaps we should delay 
it.  However, there are references to TestGL in the other documents.
MS  This will allow more resources available later and better documents to 
base TestGL on.
PC  Perhaps we can advance this in a less formal way (Wiki model).
MS  This would enable testing experts to be recruited.
LH  Wiki model will allow people with interest to work on this if they have 
Consensus: TestGL is off publication track for now.
DH  Will put TestGL into Wiki.
o       (11:15) Any IG topics, Team topics, etc.

KD  Validator going very well.  Had a meeting with company doing QA in 
process for web services.  Trying to convince people to insert QA.  Very 
interested in outreach and would like to join W3C.  Month in QA being 
continued by Lynne.

Adjourned for lunch at 1200.

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 Tuesday, 15 June 2004 17:25:48 UTC