W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Recommendations, and W3C Policy

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:12:54 -0400
Cc: <www-qa@w3.org>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Message-Id: <9D675B68-E2F9-11D7-844D-0003934BEBF0@w3.org>

Hi Jeremy,

Le mardi, 9 sep 2003, à 09:03 America/Montreal, Jeremy Carroll a écrit :
> Many (all?) of the QA documents intend to constrain other specs, WGs 
> etc
> e.g.
> "A new or rechartering Working Group MUST define its QA commitment 
> level in
> its Charter; "

The issue is a bit different. We do not impose things here. We do NOT 
say "All W3C WGs MUST recharter and define its QA commitment...."

You can read it like that.

If a WG decides to apply the QA Framework, it will have to comply to 
certain things like modifying the charter. It means that it will be a 
choice of the WG itself or not.

We believe in the self-assesment to QA, and we hope that the CR phase, 
which will start very soon for QA Ops Guidelines, will be a way to 
achieve that. If WGs want and are able to apply by themselves the QA 
Ops Guidelines, we will have a success. If it's too partial or not 
implemented at all, or with strong difficulties, it means we have a bad 
document, and we will have to work again.

What we are asking now: "Just try and tell us."

> While I do not believe it is in order to make a formal comment at the
> moment, I will make this comment at the next appropriate opportunity.

You are welcome to push your comments again.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2003 15:20:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:21 UTC