- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:43:10 -0400
- To: www-qa@w3.org
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Dear Ian, Thanks for your comments on the Last Call version of the QA Framework: Specification Guidelines[0] - 22 November 2004 After two weeks from now (on May 18, 2005), the lack of answer will be considered as if you had accepted the comment. Original comment (issue 1045 [1]) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2005Jan/0010.html Thank you for your comment, which the QA Working Group has accepted in principle but believe that the current wording discourages variability and that it isn’t appropriate to get into technical details as to what is good or bad variability, but rather should be carefully evaluated by each Working Groups (as expressed by ‘when warranted’). [2] “Good Practice 13: Create subdivisions of the technology when warranted. What does it mean? It may make sense to subdivide the technology into related groups of functionality to target specific constituencies, address specific capabilities or hardware considerations, provide for incremental implementation, facilitate usability, etc.,..” [0] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/ [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1045 [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-qaframe-spec-20050428/#subdivide- foster-gp -- Karl Dubost QA Working Group Chair http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2005 15:43:29 UTC