Re: pls avoid "book with user interface" and secret codes

Thanks for the timely response...

On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 10:57, Lofton Henderson wrote:
> Dan,
> 
> At 09:59 AM 8/29/03 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> >The material in 1.5. Understanding and using this document
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-ops/#understanding-and-using
> 
> This is the Last Call text (February).
> 
> It has been seriously improved editorially -- replaced with a 
> picture.  This was done in response to Last Call comments.  See for example 
> the "Disposition of Comments" OpsGL version which was circulated to OpsGL 
> Last Call Commenters:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/08/qaframe-ops-20030804#understanding-and-using

(1) Actually, I have seen that draft; the picture is perhaps
a bit more clear, but it's not a reduction in the number
of notational devices used in the rest of the document.

Oops; actually, what I saw was
http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2003/08/qaframe-ops-20030905/#introduction

The 0804 document does look better, at a glance.

But circulating it just to the last call commentors seems odd;
why not publish it as another last call? I guess don't
really need an answer to that now, but please think about it
for next time. But this brings me to my 2nd point...

(2) If you don't want comments on the February draft,
publish a new one; don't point me to a WG-internal document.
I realize you're planning to publish a new draft presently,
but February to August is a *long* time to go between
drafts.


> 
> >[...]
> >And regarding...
> >   Checkpoint 1.1. Commit to at least "QA level three". [Priority 1]
> >
> >What in the world does that mean?
> >Please don't introduce a whole collection of secret
> >codes into the W3C development process.
> 
> Again you are looking at Last Call (February) text.  OpsGL commenters 
> focused on this same point, and the first few checkpoints have been 
> substantially revised.

That is: you plan to substantially revise them, or you have
decided to revise them, or some such. Until you
publish your work, it's not available to the community.

> >[...]
> >
> >   See QAWG issue #18 and issue #71.
> 
> Moot, already changed.

I see.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Friday, 29 August 2003 12:09:27 UTC