Re: Conformance and Implementations

>I second that opinion. Starting a w3c certification process would be,
>IMHO, costly (in terms of time and money), tricky, and in the end I'm
>not quite sure it would be very efficient to addres our concern of
>"bogus" compliance claims.

In general I don't think W3C is trying to set up certification services - 
but rather providing guidance (and perhaps recommending a path of action) 
as to what is involved in establishing and operating a certification 
service for a particular Recommendation.  Since certification/branding does 
involve legal implications, then it is the purview of the certifying 
organization  to establish the actual process, policy, procedures for doing 
the certification and issuing certificates/brands.  However, it could be 
within the W3C interest to 'recognize' these certification services - in 
that case, it would make sense for W3C to have some criteria or guideline 
for 'granting' this recognition.

If you take this recognition a step backwards (in the testing scheme) - 
first you need the Test Suites.  So I agree with
>Let's test. Let's make good test suites, good implementation tests
>and test reports.

This is a critical piece.  If you don't have good tests and clear test 
reports, then the issue of certification is moot.

Additionally, there are organizations/individuals other than W3C that have 
developed test suites for W3C Recommendations (e.g., OASIS, and some of the 
W3C validating tools were 'donated' by individuals).  One of the topics for 
QA discussion is the recognition of test suites developed outside of W3C WGs.

Lynne


Lynne S. Rosenthal
NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8970
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8970
(301)975-3353, fax (301)948-6213
lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov