- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:49:20 +0100
- To: 'www-qa-wg@w3.org' <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <E046F3E5-28B5-11D9-8C06-000A95718F82@w3.org>
Agenda for Thursday QA WG F2F - Reading (UK) Main Topic: SpecGL reading-001: Lynne - [[[ Our Conformance Clause uses “must” and has a normative implication. ]]] http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2004/10/WD-qaframe-spec/#conformance must is used in lowercase. In the whole document only principles are normatives. The rest is informative. reading-002: Lynne - [[[ 1.1 Good Practice B: Define the specification's conformance model in the conformance clause. ]]] http://www.w3.org/QA/Group/2004/10/WD-qaframe-spec/#conformance-model About the techniques: [[[ This may be too Profile/Level/Module focused. #1 Thought we were going to stay away from the term DoV. ]]] reading-003: Bjoern/Dom/Karl - 2.3 Make a list of normative (and non-normative) references No Principles defined, No Good Practices defined. Suggestions: Principle: Create a list of Normative references. Issues for GP and/or Principles - When making a normative reference, you need to see how future versions of the said specification may affect your own document. But How do you evaluate that. How are you sure that you will be able to make reference to something you do not necessary control. You may want to draw a diagram of dependencies ala XHTML-Print but it can't be a requirement. http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Test/xhtml-print/current/spec.jpg - Address the way you "use" the conformance model of the referred specification When you are making a reference to another specification it comes with its own conformance model, you should not modify it and respect it but if you really need to do it. What do you have to take care of. References: Lofton Send a message http://www.w3.org/mid/5.1.0.14.2.20041020071036.02fb04f8@rockynet.com [[[ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-svg-wg/2004OctDec/0419.html (member-only) This is an interesting aspect of the (open) normative references topic for SpecGL. A normative reference might not be tied to a specific version of the referenced standard. This means that the conformance requirements for the referencing standard might change over time.]]] reading-004 [[[3.1 Good Practice C: <del>Define the terms in-line, and consolidate the definitions in a glossary section</del>]]] This section needs to have a new wording. The idea is that the terms have to be defined locally but have to be consolidated in a glossary where you can refer to with all the terms in one place. reading-005 [[[ 4.1 Good Practice A: Create subdivisions of the technology when warranted by the variety of use cases. ]]] ISSUE: Need umbrella to encompass more than use cases, but also requirements, technology, etc. reading-006 Mark's Skall review of "2.1 GP C: Provide Examples, Use Cases and Graphics." http://www.w3.org/mid/ 6.0.0.22.2.20041021151740.03b371a8@wsxg03.nist.gov In addition Richard Kennedy has reviewed the review :))) http://www.w3.org/mid/ 5.1.0.14.2.20041023125201.00bb6060@mailserver.nist.gov reading-007 Reference to TestGL to be removed To add QAH, QAF-Primer, ViS Any persons against that? http://www.w3.org/mid/ 5.1.0.14.2.20041020122528.030b5c58@mailserver.nist.gov reading-008 Examples given by Jeremy Carroll for DOV http://www.w3.org/mid/ 5.1.0.14.2.20041025093412.00b0e210@mailserver.nist.gov Should it go in SpecGL or in Variability in Specifications http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jun/0053.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jun/0054.html reading-009 David's Marston answer to the TAG about versioning http://www.w3.org/mid/OF2ABD879D.2DB02525-ON85256F38.004E0420@lotus.com Do we agree? Who is sending it to the TAG? reading-010 Lofton - [[[1.1 Good Practice C Specify in the conformance clause how to distinguish normative from informative content ]]] [[[ There's still an issue from Lofton if we should define here the way the normative language is defined. ]]] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Aug/0081.html reading-011 David Marston - Mandatory Modules in SpecGL http://www.w3.org/mid/OF5886BB1B.34CC8B90-ON85256F20.005EF581@lotus.com The comments were made on the August version of the document, not the editor's draft. Proposed changes: The techniques and the graphics. reading-012 David Marston - Mandatory Modules in Vis http://www.w3.org/mid/OF4C2464B1.C80438DA-ON85256F23.00051268 -85256F23.000912A9@lotus.com reading-013 Lofton - QA Handbook http://www.w3.org/mid/5.1.0.14.2.20041027112236.03760238@rockynet.com - Numbering Scheme - Renaming Principles as Guidelines more than GPs to avoid redundancy Action Items to do AI-20041018-1: Karl to find an example of ICS for SpecGL by 2004-10-25 of GP 1.2C AI-20041018-2: Karl to review the usage of "developer" in SpecGL by 2004-10-25 AI-20041018-3: Karl to adapt the wording wrt normative vs informative sections in "about the document", in SpecGL by 2004-10-25 -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 28 October 2004 08:18:10 UTC