W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > March 2005

RE: Issue 1041: ICS Good Practices: 1.2 A, B., C

From: Lynne S. Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:15:24 -0500
Message-ID: <60DE4C815920CA41AF6CC5CFDA9CC849BBBC19@WSXG03.campus.nist.gov>
To: "'www-qa-wg@w3.org'" <www-qa-wg@w3.org>
Just another thought - on SpecGL's ICS


Since we want WGs to complete the SpecGL ICS and since we are going to
complete the SpecGL ICS for SpecGL --- we should include a statement on the
blank pro-forma (so that it is on the completed ICS) - that the completed
ICS is the WGs (or editor's) articulation as to which Requirements and GPs
have been implemented.  Since we don't have any 'tests' to link to from the
ICS - do we want to say something about this?  


Basically, we should make sure that it is clear what the SpecGL ICS is ---
is it an ICS or an augmented ICS.  I think it is an ICS and we need to make
this clear.



Received on Friday, 18 March 2005 12:16:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:38 UTC