- From: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:06:32 +0200
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1114077993.24580.147.camel@stratustier>
Hi QA WG, I've (almost) completed SpecGL ICS for SpecGL: http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2005/04/specgl-specgl-ics.html The good news is that SpecGL does indeed conform to SpecGL, since we have yes or n/a to all the Requierments. With regard to Good practices, there is one we don't pass: "Write Test assertions". Given what SpecGL is and its audience, I think this is OK, but maybe we should have a more formal answer as to why we don't? Also, I haven't yet filled up the answer for GP 15 (Use optional features as warranted) since we're in the process of discussing whether GP are indeed optional features. I think to pass the GP we should document why they are optional - I haven't found such a description in SpecGL, but maybe I missed it? Of course, I would appreciate a careful review of the completed ICS, to see whether any of you disagrees with my assessment, or doesn't find the referenced text a convincing implementation of the Req/GP. Dom -- Dominique Hazaël-Massieux - http://www.w3.org/People/Dom/ W3C/ERCIM mailto:dom@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2005 10:06:35 UTC