- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:35:40 +0200
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1096299340.15676.182.camel@stratustier>
Le mar 21/09/2004 à 11:15, Dominique Hazaël-Massieux a écrit : > Glancing quickly through > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2004Jun/0044.html and > comparing it with http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20040830/ , > it appears that most of the decisions we took wrt editorial comments for > SpecGL haven't been implemented in the text yet; so, one of the issues > that needs to be solved before going to last call is to actually > implement them. Karl mentioned during today teleconf that he couldn't spot what decisions haven't been incorporated; here are a few examples: "Decision: remove the 'boilerplate' RFC keywords section (and also from the normative section)" but we still have it at http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20040830/#structure "* Text inside "good practice" sections should make sense "out of context" (if extracted into a separate list, for example)" There a a few good practices that I think aren't very clear when extracted, e.g. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20040830/#need-option-gp "Determine the need for each option. Make sure there is a real need for the option." (for instance, using "optional feature" instead of "option" would help) """A1: "Why care" justifications sometimes don't address benefits in terms that "appeal to" the spec author. Show how their self-interest will be served by following our recommendations - to say "you will meet our recommendations" is insufficient.""" still, the "why care" section reads http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20040830/#include-conformance-clause-principle """A well constructed conformance clause brings most of the benefit of these QA Specification Guidelines for the least effort. Almost all of SpecGL's significant advice — normative Principles and recommended Good Practices alike — are satisfied with a good conformance clause.""" I haven't made a thorough review of all the editorial decisions; these ones are the ones I had noticed when I sent my original message. Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Monday, 27 September 2004 15:35:42 UTC