- From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 08:44:23 +0100
- To: lofton@rockynet.com
- cc: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov>, www-qa@w3.org
I agree with Lynne, but could live with doing it after the FPWD. > I think Lynne's proposal has a lot of merit. Other opinions? Is this something that we should: > > ** do now (i.e., everyone likes it)? > ** do never? > ** postpone till after FPWD? > ** discuss in WG telcon (1/28)? > > -Lofton. > > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: Lynne Rosenthal <lynne.rosenthal@nist.gov> > Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 10:33:31 -0500 > > >My comments on Guideline 1 of the Framework: Process & Operational Guidelines > > > >Given that Guidelines are informational and used to structure the > >checkpoints in sets that define similar requirements and Checkpoints are > >normative; I propose an alternative Guideline 1. > > > >Currently the focus of Guideline 1 is the Charter and the inclusion of QA > >goals, criteria etc. I propose an alternative that is, the focus of the > >first Guideline be the WG's plans and integration of QA activities and > >deliverables into the WG. This would include planning, identifying goals, > >deliverables, etc for conformance test materials, practices etc. It would > >also (as a checkpoint) include putting something in the Charter. I think > >this would be a 'gentler' way to get WGs thinking about QA and also get > >them thinking of it in a broader sense, not just for developing tests and > >tools. > > > >Thus, I propose something like: > > > >Guideline 1: Integrate QA practices and deliverables into Working Group > >activities. > >Explanation would include how QA is integral to specs and implementations > >of those specs rather than an afterthought; that WGs should plan for what > >needs to be done; that experience has shown (e.g., XSL-FO, DOM, etc) that > >including QA has enhanced the development of the deliverables. > > > >Checkpoint1.1 Identify QA deliverables, expected milestones, etc. > >Checkpoint 1.2 Determine level of commitment and scope of test materials > >Checkpoint 1.3 Define resources to staff effort > >Checkpoint 1.4 Indicate breath and depth of test material coverage > >necessary for CR-exit > >Checkpont 1.5 Include QA activities and deliverables in Charter > >(note that for Charters, the W3C Process requires that deliverables be > >identified with milestones, etc.) > > > >Basically, Checkpoints 1-4 are the steps to get to Checkpoint 5. > > > >If you don't accept the proposed Guideline 1 then, I propose the following > >change to the current Checkpoint 1: > >Guideline 1: Include QA activities and deliverables in Charter > >Checkpoints 1-4 same as above. > > > > > >Respectfully submitted. > >Lynne > >
Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 02:44:29 UTC