- From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
- Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:10:29 -0500
- To: www-qa-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20050430150623.00ba3df0@mailserver.nist.gov>
QA Working Group Teleconference Monday, 25 April 2005 Scribe: Lynne Attendees: (TB) Tim Boland (NIST) (PC) Patrick Curran (Sun Microsystems) (DD) Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon) (KD) Karl Dubost (W3C, Chair) (DH) Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (W3C) (LH) Lofton Henderson (CGMO) (LR) Lynne Rosenthal (NIST) (MS) Mark Skall (NIST) Regrets: (RK) Richard Kennedy (Boeing) Absent: Summary of New Action Items: AI-20052504-01: Karl to draft umbrella specification text: 26 April 2005 AI-20052504-02: Dimitris to add SVG Tiny, re-sort table, add introduction: 28 April 2005 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Apr/0105.html Previous Telcon Minutes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Apr/0106.html Minutes: 1) Roll call 2) Routine Business Dublin F2F: no new information at this time regarding logistics 3) GP as optional features: [1] Lofton's proposal Good Practices were considered informative, but agreement to change GPs to be considered normative, optional. Lofton's drafted a proposal (subject line blank). Proposal includes definitions of normative and informative, definitions that were in previous version of SpecGL. Agree with proposed changes. Item C., Lofton to find email with suggested wording, so editors can make appropriate change. Item D, boilerplate wording of RFC 2119. SpecGL recommends uppercase or bold. Should we follow this advice? SpecGL currently uses lowercase, no distinctive formatting. Karl to implement specific markup for MUST and make it visible (bold). Item J. Defined label: "specification guidelines conformant", but never use this label. Editors need to incorporate the label into the section on conformance claims. Put into SpecGL conformance claim template. Glossary terms. Review glossary to make sure all terms in the document are also in the glossary. This needs to be done, but is deferred until after publication of next working draft. 4) Draft Answer Reviews (Karl, Dom, Patrick) Karl has a few to do, Lynne and Richard need to do theirs. Dom has integrated all the drafts he has received. Accept reviews that have been sent to mailing list. Lofton still has a few more to do. 5) SpecGL issues: 1148 [2], 1149 [3] 1148. Accept. Drop example 1149. Accept new prose. 6) Variability in Specification publishing Text for umbrella specification needs to be improved and include discussion that was on this topic. Volunteer: Karl Since there is a link in SpecGL, we need to republish this document. It would be best to have new text on umbrella specification done in time for republication. It is O.K. to put in draft text that has not been fully reviewed by the WG. Goal is to publish at same time as SpecGL. Additional text needed for: explaining the different categories and address discretionary items. Karl to ask Dave Marston to draft text. 7) SpecGl Implementation Report [4] Dimitris has drafted a preliminary report. Still need to do ICS for SVG Tiny. Provides an excellent summarized review. At top, need to indicate all the specifications that are included in the Tables. Suggest reordering the table (sort by date) to show that SpecGL has helped to improve specification writing. Should we do more? Put current version in WG space, so that we can link to it, showing we have a preliminary implementation report. If there are too many requirements or good practices that have not been implemented - how should we handle these? There are 2 implementations that have implemented everything (XML:id and SpecGL). Put SVG Tiny into table. Any volunteers to review other specifications? Silence. Dom to publish on WG space when received from Dimitris. 8) Publication status of Test FAQ Can we announce this? Thank you to Patrick on a job well done. Patrick having it reviewed by a tech writer (doing quality review). Will have it done by end of the week. Be prepared for comments - comments is a good thing. Adjourn. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Apr/0099.html [2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1148 [3] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1149 [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Apr/att-0100/SpecGLImplementationReport20050422.html
Received on Saturday, 30 April 2005 20:11:53 UTC