Building QA Experience in the W3C

Rob Lanphier
Curtis Reynolds
April 4, 2001

Speed of the W3C

Well-resourced W3C QA Activity Needed

Recommendations - QA Review Group

Recommendations - Certification program

Recommendation - Certified Recommendation Phase

Testcase/testplan markup language

(more dead horse beating) More formal issue tracking on suites and specifications

  • Needs to have formal steps for disposition of comments
  • Issue tool may be the only manage this properly
  • QA Activity members may be best qualified to design workflow
  • Vendors must support backwards compatibility with their old products

  • Imperfect products happen
  • Old documents must survive - should care more about substance than grammar
  • ...but there are tools that can be used

  • Aesthetically unpleasant element can be shown when document is not compliant (iCab frown face is one way; blinking frown face may be even better)
  • Vendors can withhold new features from non-conformant documents
  • Validators can be built into user agents
  • W3C needs to recommend rational behavior when documents don't conform