- From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:32:28 +0100
- To: www-qa@w3.org
Presents and introductions (because new participants on board) Lofton chair DD scribe Dimitris, Jack, Dom, Olivier, Lynne, Karl, Peter, Kyryll, Coleen, Andrew Regrets Mark Minutes of previous telcon (2002-01-28): http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2002Feb/0000.html Agenda items Web site - if people have comments on qa web space, send them to olivier cc qawg list - we now use rss syndication for the qa news page, used by the w3c at a glance service Action: Olivier to send more info about that Comm liaison - Lynne to liaise with Ian on that if needs happen Tech Plenary coverage - we want people to attend other WG and be ready to answer questions about QA, inform people about Lofton prez, the framework, etc - we'll take on the list the assignment of coverage and also talking points Action Karl to track coverage, DD to prepare talking points Framework schedule - goal to publish again 1er april 2002, with WG version 8th march First PWD spec guidelines, techniques for Process Second PWD Intro and Process Going over Issues list <url> - 27: closed (using guidelines/checkpoints for maintenance section) - 30: closed (transfer example to techniques doc) - 31: closed (edited out) - 34: closed (done in the FPWD) - 9: closed (we created 2 cp, a priority problem now) Action on Kyryll on producing wording regarding TS archiving - 39: Action Lofton: split it in normative language/priotity setting - 49: licence for ts (cp 6.3)=20 Andrew: issue of ts written on top of proprietary system, either just assertions to be used with a closed harness or a complete system that only works if you have VisualBasic (so closed to =20 linux). DD: could use different priorities so that open stuff is preferred but anything is better than nothing Kyryll: not in favor of creating another licence Andrew: we should write down some criteria for ts licence Action: DD to talk to Karl about finding out what's used in TS listed in the Matrix - 50: liability: not discussed
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 04:40:12 UTC