- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 20:21:29 -0500
- To: 'www-qa-wg@w3.org' <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <d7bd6cd91e2f42f021840ccc52ffbd25@w3.org>
Hi QA WG, there's a work going on the CDF Mailing List to define three terms: - feature, - interoperable - implementation Abstract of my research - feature QA SpecGL: 120 - not defined Process: 12 - not defined - interoperable, interoperability QA SpecGL: 30 - not defined Process: 5 - not defined - implementation QA SpecGL: 95 - defined Process: 34 - not defined [Member only] http://www.w3.org/mid/ Pine.LNX.4.61.0503091206030.5940@dhalsim.dreamhost.com I will ask if it's possible to share it on www-qa@w3.org mailing list for the benefits of a wider community. Here follows, the use of features in the Process document, It's never defined what a feature is even if it has a lot of implications in the process. In 7.4.3 Call for Implementations [[[ In the Call for Implementations, the Working Group MAY identify specific features of the technical report as being "features at risk." General statements such as "We plan to remove any unimplemented feature" are not acceptable; the Working Group MUST precisely identify any features at risk. Thus, in response to a Call for Implementations, reviewers can indicate whether they would formally object to the removal of the identified features. After gathering implementation experience, the Working Group MAY remove features from the technical report that were identified as being "at risk" and request that the Director Call for Review of a Proposed Recommendation. If the Working Group makes other substantive changes to the technical report, the Director MUST return it to the Working Group for further work. ]]]- http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process In 7.4.4 Call for Review of a Proposed Recommendation [[[ 2. Shown that each feature of the technical report has been implemented. Preferably, the Working Group SHOULD be able to demonstrate two interoperable implementations of each feature. If the Director believes that immediate Advisory Committee review is critical to the success of a technical report, the Director MAY accept to Call for Review of a Proposed Recommendation even without adequate implementation experience; ]]]- http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process In 7.4.6 Returning a Document to a Working Group for Further Work [[[ 1. The Working Group makes substantive changes to the technical report at any time after a Last Call announcement and prior to Publication as a Recommendation, except when the changes involve the removal of features at risk identified in a Call for Implementations. In the case of substantive changes, the Working Group MUST republish the technical report as a Working Draft. ]]]- http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process In 7.6.2 Classes of Changes to a Recommendation [[[ 3. Corrections that MAY affect conformance, but add no new features ]]]- http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process and [[[ 4. New features For new features, W3C follows the full process of advancing a technical report to Recommendation. ]]]- http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process To be fully honest, we use _120 times_ "feature" in the QA Specification Guidelines without defining it. We define in the glossary [[[ * Deprecated feature An existing feature that has become outdated and is in the process of being phased out, usually in favor of a specified replacement. Deprecated features are no longer recommended for use and may cease to exist in future versions of the specification. * Obsolete feature An existing or deprecated feature has ceased to exist and that is listed for historical purpose. * Module A collection of semantically-related features that represents a unit of functionality. ]]] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/#glossary We define Implementation 34 times in Process document 95 times in QA Specification Guidelines. but we don't define interoperability. We use the terms interoperability, interoperable, etc. about 30 times. Process document is using it 5 times -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2005 01:22:17 UTC