RE: [RDFa] Yet another QA-related question

Tim,

>Does your proposed 'umbrella' document provide any of the 
>following (from your reference [3]):

IMHO it should, yes, definitely. Still I think we should
advance incrementally. Thus, talking first about 'is it such
an umbrella document', then, if the answer is yes, what
should go in there.

Cheers,
	Michael

BTW: I'm going to raise an issue in the RDF in HTML TF that
     will contain your comments, if you agree to do so :) 

----------------------------------------------------------
 Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
 Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
 JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
  
 http://www.joanneum.at/iis/
----------------------------------------------------------
 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: boland@nist.gov [mailto:boland@nist.gov] 
>Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 2:02 PM
>To: Hausenblas, Michael
>Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org; public-swd-wg@w3.org; www-qa@w3.org
>Subject: Re: [RDFa] Yet another QA-related question
>
>Does your proposed 'umbrella' document provide any of the 
>following (from your 
>reference [3]:
>
>-a roadmap to the documents, including listing them, 
>-a global view of this technology, 
>-an explanation or rationale for creating this series of documents, 
>-a description of each document, 
>-terminology that applies across this technology, 
>-a description of the relationship among the documents referenced, 
>-a conformance clause for this technology, 
>-a discussion of the conformance model and/or conformance 
>consequences when 
>selecting among these documents, 
>-an implementation conformance statement for this technology, or
>-a tutorial of this technology?
>
>Thanks and best wishes
>Tim Boland NIST 
>
> 
>
>Quoting "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>:
>
>> 
>> 
>> When reading [1] I understand that what we are doing for RDFa,
>> is actually setting up an umbrella specification [3].
>> 
>> So what is missing in my (limited) understanding is a document 
>> that actually _is_ the umbrella specification document. This
>> document (overview, guide, etc.) might state that the RDFa spec
>> consists of the following documents, as of [2]:
>> 
>>  + XHTML Metainformation Module 
>>  + XHTML Metainformation Attributes Module 
>>  + RDFa Primer 1.0 
>>  + RDFa Syntax
>>  + RDFa Use Cases: Scenarios for Embedding RDF in HTML
>>  + RDFa Test Suite
>> 
>> Am I totally wrong with this?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 	Michael
>> 
>> 
>> BTW, Karl D.: As I followed your advice to CC: www-qa@w3.org,
>>      I would very much appreciate comments from your side as well :)
>>      The same applies to other posts ([4] and [5]) from the last days
>> ... 
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/spec-variability/
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFa#RDFa_documents
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/spec-variability/#umbrella
>> [4]
>> 
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007
Feb/0028.
>> html
>> [5]
>> 
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007
Feb/0027.
>> html
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>  Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
>>  Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
>>  JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
>>  Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, AUSTRIA
>> 
>>  <office>
>>     phone: +43-316-876-1193 (fax:-1191)   
>>    e-mail: michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at
>>       web: http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ 
>> 
>>  <private>
>>    mobile: +43-660-7621761
>>       web: http://www.sw-app.org/ 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 9 February 2007 13:21:15 UTC