14:18:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #qa
14:18:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc
14:19:08 <olivier> olivier: take up agenda 1
14:19:08 <olivier> [09:17] Zakim: thinks agendum 1. "finding scribes" taken up [from dom]
14:19:09 <olivier> [09:17] olivier: day 1 AM: olivier
14:19:09 <olivier> [09:17] olivier: day 1 PM: mark
14:20:53 <dom> agenda+ report of interactions withh CSS
14:21:16 <olivier> scribes: day2 AM lynne, day2PM Patrick
14:21:26 <olivier> agenda+ future of QAWG
14:21:32 <olivier> zakim, take up agenda 3
14:21:32 <Zakim> agendum 3. "future of QAWG" taken up [from olivier]
14:21:57 <olivier> Dom reports recent decision to make QAWG continue until at least August
14:22:28 <olivier> W3C Management wanted to see result of LC, and feedback was positive enough
14:23:00 <olivier> work of the QAWG has been appreciated, this is good
14:23:00 <olivier> leaves us until August to bring SpecGL to REC
14:23:48 <olivier> dom: we may get a few months' extension to wrap up the work if we get to REC
14:23:48 <olivier> ... to handle the start of life after REC
14:23:48 <olivier> ... which leads us to ~ nov-dec this year
14:24:03 <olivier> ... Currently Karl is the sole chair of the WG, requested some help to be able to focus energy on more liaisons
14:25:54 <olivier> karl: requesting more active participation from WG participants, to make the animation of the WG smoother
14:26:10 <olivier> dom: should we give roles, or keep this informal?
14:26:32 <olivier> karl: no need to give people more formal commitment at the moment
14:26:56 <olivier> ... there is, however, a lack of participation on the mailing-list
14:26:56 <olivier> ... which makes it difficult to prepare agenda, etc.
14:28:35 <olivier> dom: have to agree with Karl that activity on ML has not been at its highest, and that can be problematic because the WG cannot handle everything during telcons
14:29:09 <olivier> dom: is there anything that karl or myself can do to help you participating more?
14:29:53 <olivier> Mark: hard times at NIST, consumed a lot of our time
14:30:04 <olivier> ... should slow down after April
14:30:25 <olivier> ... unfortunate, it limited our participation
14:31:06 <olivier> Richard: would not mind having tasks assigned
14:31:06 <olivier> ... being new makes it a bit difficult to know what I should be doing
14:32:10 <olivier> Patrick: similar situation to Mark's, very busy, but committed to come back to task (test FAQ) ASAP
14:33:14 <olivier> Lofton: my volunteer free time has been limited... might lighten up in a few months
14:33:14 <olivier> karl: will make proposals in the weeks to come, based on this feedback
14:33:37 <olivier> Richard: given meeting schedule, having the agenda earlier would help
14:34:52 <olivier> karl: agrees, will try 
14:35:11 <olivier> ... really encourage people to add dynamic to mailing-list, will help too
14:36:04 <olivier> Note: Patrick Callahan, doing QA at Sun, observer
14:36:15 <olivier> ... wanted to familiarize with issues of the QAWG
14:36:20 <olivier> zakim, agenda?
14:36:20 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
14:36:21 <Zakim> 1. finding scribes [from dom]
14:36:23 <Zakim> 2. report of interactions withh CSS [from dom]
14:36:24 <Zakim> 3. future of QAWG [from olivier]
14:36:28 <dom> Zakim, close agendum 1
14:36:28 <Zakim> agendum 1 closed
14:36:29 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:36:30 <Zakim> 2. report of interactions withh CSS [from dom]
14:36:30 <olivier> zakim, close agenda 3
14:36:30 <Zakim> agendum 3 closed
14:36:31 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
14:36:32 <Zakim> 2. report of interactions withh CSS [from dom]
14:36:40 <olivier> zakim, agenda+ QAIG report
14:36:40 <Zakim> agendum 4 added
14:36:48 <olivier> zakim, take up agenda4
14:36:48 <Zakim> agendum 4. "QAIG report" taken up [from olivier]
14:37:04 <dom> ScribeNick: dom
14:37:20 <dom> olivier: the QA IG is a bit of a mixed bucket
14:37:33 <dom> ... we haven't had a very big activity in the IG in the past few months
14:37:45 <dom> ... except as part of being a channel for QA comments
14:37:51 <dom> s/QA/QA WG/
14:38:11 <dom> ... the QA IG is also hosting projects for Education & Outreach resources for Web standards
14:38:27 <dom> ... we have had a common project with the WaSP (Web Standards Project)
14:38:37 <dom> ... it has slowed down a lot since last summer
14:39:11 <dom> ... we want to finish our current article on <object> tag in HTML
14:39:32 <dom> ... once this done, we'll probably want to restart this project with another org
14:39:57 <dom> ... we don't want to just publish on our own, since it's important for us to get an interface with the public
14:40:23 <dom> ... other projects under QA IG realm are tools
14:40:40 <dom> ... esp the QA IG is animating the work of several open sources projects
14:40:46 <dom> ... e.g. the Markup and CSS validators
14:41:48 <dom> ... we're trying to improve the communications with the WG developing the technologies tested by these tools
14:42:01 <dom> ... I'll be meeting with the HTML WG tomorrow for instance
14:42:24 <dom> Tim: the CSS Validator needs some major revisions
14:42:35 <dom> ... we discussed it at our F2F
14:43:06 <dom> olivier: the CSS Validator was developed by someone who was not part of the CSS WG
14:43:13 <dom> ... then it got unmaintained
14:43:23 <dom> ... so the QA IG took it under its wing
14:43:31 <dom> ... and I tried to re-energize the project
14:44:02 <dom> ... but it has proved to be difficult, since it is somewhat hard to maintain
14:45:05 <dom> Tim: Bert, CSS WG Chair, was envisioning maybe that a rewrite from scratch was needed
14:45:10 <dom> ... due to the high number of changes
14:46:10 <dom> ... Bert has an action item to track the validator-related issues
14:47:42 <dom> olivier: one of the questions wrt the IG was how the IG would or could be remodeled after the WG closes
14:48:15 <dom> agenda+ report on yesterday lunch table
14:48:56 <dom> tim: one of the requests that was made during yesterday lunch table about tests was to have a repository of tests
14:49:25 <dom> ... that should be done at a level above the WG level, as in the pubrules
14:49:39 <dom> zakim, pick up agendum 5
14:49:39 <Zakim> I don't understand 'pick up agendum 5', dom
14:49:44 <dom> zakim, take up agendum 5
14:49:44 <Zakim> agendum 5. "report on yesterday lunch table" taken up [from dom]
14:50:28 <dom> olivier: at my table, the point was made that it was hard enough to come up with a test suite for a single spec
14:50:42 <dom> ... let alone thinking about multi-specs ts
14:50:51 <dom> ... but the need for a common ground was raised
14:51:05 <dom> ... www-qa could certainly be used as a way to discuss this type of questions
14:51:34 <dom> ... maybe we could renew that use of  www-qa by announcing to chairs@w3.org
14:51:55 <lofton> lofton has joined #qa
14:53:07 <dom> dom: my only fear with using www-qa for that is that people would have bigger expectations than what we can match today
14:53:27 <dom> olivier: I think we have already some pretty good materials to hand over
14:54:02 <dom> ... plus, some chairs and staff contacts are pretty happy about their work on test suites
14:54:15 <dom> ... and could answer these types of requests
14:54:38 <dom> dom: but that hasn't proved to be what happened in the past
14:54:48 <dom> olivier: yeah, www-qa is maybe not the right place now
14:54:57 <dom> ... but maybe we can turn it into the right place
14:55:16 <dom> ... I'm hopeful this can happen if we get more people from chairs@w3.org
14:55:50 <dom> tim: another concern was the body of knowledge a WG gathers when building a TS get lost when the group closes
14:56:14 <dom> ... so an idea was for the WG to provide a report or summary of their knowledge on the matter before closing
14:56:37 <dom> olivier: besides process, I don't think WG would want to do that at the time they're closing
14:57:18 <dom> http://www.w3.org/QA/TheMatrix
14:57:21 <olivier> ... but if the documentation has been taken care of during life of WG, it's just a matter of packaging
14:57:35 <olivier> dom: we could be more proactive in requesting sharing of experience
14:57:50 <olivier> ... we already manage the QA Matrix http://www.w3.org/QA/TheMatrix
14:58:45 <olivier> ... (dom shows matrix)
15:00:00 <olivier> ... we could be more proactive in gathering that knowledge
15:00:15 <olivier> ... we actually did that at some point, with RDF Core and OWL
15:01:04 <olivier> olivier: We can't do everything, but in any case a mail to chairs@ now and then wouldn't hurt
15:02:04 <olivier> dom: anyone else has interesting points to report on this lunch table session?
15:02:27 <olivier> (discussing when Wendy and Jon will be able to send us the feedback material from that session)
15:04:03 <olivier> tim: CR criteria could be made more easily available (? scribe missed)
15:04:14 <olivier> dom: - explains more about implementation reports - 
15:04:28 <olivier> ... there may be a lack of information, still
15:05:02 <olivier> ... this reinforces the point that we should send a mail to chairs@ , pointing to matrix, inviting to discussion in www-qa
15:05:13 <olivier> ACTION: dom to send a mail to chairs@ , pointing to matrix, inviting to discussion in www-qa
15:07:40 <olivier> Lofton: - gives some background on ERT WG, EARL, and their interest in test cases description language
15:09:33 <olivier> Mark: some interesting point of view from someone in WAI
15:10:10 <olivier> ... discussion on why test suites can or cannot be comprehensive enough to cover accessibility 
15:12:03 <olivier> Patrick: xforms guy - they lost they TS - raised the issue of hosting
15:12:44 <dom> olivier: sometimes, WGs have very precise requirements
15:12:57 <dom> ... hard to conciliate sometimes with our existing systems
15:13:12 <dom> ... but losing a TS sounds really incredible
15:13:40 <olivier> ... could recommend backup to w3c space even if TS not hosted here
15:16:56 <dom> olivier: at my lunch table, the point was made that it may be more important to make it easy to contribute test cases rather than to make it automatable
15:17:11 <dom> mark: I think it is rather naive
15:18:13 <dom> lynne: we've seen that not providing a test harness make basically a test suite irrelevant
15:18:19 <dom> ... because it doesn't get used
15:18:30 <olivier> more discussion on relative importance of making a TS easy to contribute, and importance of a harness to make it easy to (re)use
15:19:00 <olivier> lynne: both are importance. relative importance may depend on who you are targetting
15:19:08 <olivier> s/importance/important/
15:21:40 <olivier> lynne: not everyone was happy with this session (socializing was good, though) but I think in the end it worked well
15:24:11 <olivier> Patrick Callahan: notes that honestly had trouble understanding what this was about - wasn't very clear, even though it may have generated good ideas
15:27:04 <olivier> Lofton: thinking the results were pretty positive -only 5 no response. 
15:27:18 <olivier> ... maybe we could leverage that after the fact to recruit for the qawg
15:29:55 <olivier> 10:30 - break 
15:30:19 <dom> for 15 minutes
15:30:46 <Zakim> -Karl
15:54:52 <karl> zakim, call karl-work
15:54:52 <Zakim> ok, karl; the call is being made
15:54:53 <Zakim> +Karl
15:55:50 <olivier> agenda?
15:56:06 <olivier> zakim, close agenda 4
15:56:06 <Zakim> agendum 4 closed
15:56:08 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:56:08 <olivier> zakim, close agenda 5
15:56:09 <Zakim> 2. report of interactions withh CSS [from dom]
15:56:10 <Zakim> agendum 5 closed
15:56:11 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:56:12 <Zakim> 2. report of interactions withh CSS [from dom]
15:56:37 <olivier> zakim, agenda+ QA Documents: Status
15:56:37 <Zakim> agendum 6 added
15:57:33 <olivier> dom: goal of this session is to discuss the status and plans for documents produced by QAWG
15:57:42 <olivier> ... starting with "valiability in specifications"
15:57:55 <olivier> ... I am the lead editor, new editor draft readty
15:58:02 <olivier> s/readty/ready/
15:58:53 <olivier> ... this new draft includes changes based on feedback
15:59:31 <olivier> ... still working on it, will have to add the remaining dimensions (extensibility, optional features) without re-inventing what has been done already (in specGL)
15:59:57 <olivier> lynne: what is the final goal for this doc?
16:00:11 <olivier> dom: WG note - should be a good goal for this publication, it's in pretty good shape
16:00:33 <karl> q+
16:01:35 <olivier> karl: we should publish it as a WG note. it's already a good doc, and that would attract more comments
16:01:58 <olivier> ... should not wait too much to publish it, extension etc are being discussed a lot at the moment within w3c
16:03:32 <olivier> dom: significant amount of work needed, not trivial to publish soon
16:03:51 <olivier> karl: would be happy to help by reviewing
16:04:54 <olivier> ACTION: karl to send ideas for extensibility section of ViS
16:05:24 <olivier> lynne: will review it
16:06:07 <olivier> dom: schedule: cannot expect anything ready before end of month
16:06:18 <olivier> ... may target publication for end of April
16:07:19 <olivier> Tim: deprecation should be addressed in ViS
16:07:48 <olivier> dom: could be addressed along with extensibility, matches current discussions on extensibility and versioning
16:09:31 <olivier> karl: have to coordinate with TAG on these issues
16:10:24 <karl> karl: TAG and QA WG are working on the same topics often
16:10:39 <karl> ... I think the QA WG should focus on the logistics part of it
16:10:49 <karl> ... more than the theoritical part of it
16:10:49 <olivier> ... and let TAG focus on theory
16:11:35 <olivier> dom: talked with Vincent Quint, new chair of TAG - agree that discussion on common work and how to split it would be good
16:11:52 <olivier> karl : I think we should send whatever theoretical ideas as comments to the TAG
16:12:06 <olivier> ... practical solutions could be added to a document such as ViS
16:12:23 <olivier> ... we must remain practical in our publications
16:13:23 <olivier> -> Test FAQ document
16:13:38 <olivier> Patrick: little progress in last month 
16:13:45 <olivier> ... hope to get back to it in a couple of weeks
16:13:59 <olivier> ... we want to keep it short and pythy, we are probably close
16:14:05 <olivier> ... maybe need more examples
16:14:50 <olivier> ACTION: Patrick to give list of examples we are looking for  (Test FAQ)
16:15:05 <olivier> s/pythy/pithy/
16:15:25 <olivier> s/FAQ)/FAQ) by March 18th/
16:15:54 <RRSAgent> I'm logging.  Sorry, nothing found for 'where are we'
16:16:02 <RRSAgent> I'm logging.  Sorry, nothing found for 'current location'
16:16:10 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-16-02
16:16:31 <olivier> Patrick: we could even be aggressive and try to publish by end of month
16:17:53 <dom> dom: Lynne sent a link to a testing faq this morning to www-qa
16:18:08 <dom> lynne: could be usefully used as a checklist for us to see what we've addressed or not
16:18:16 <dom> ... or as an external reference
16:18:29 <dom> patrick: I think it would be good to point to it
16:19:16 <olivier> karl: was wondering if bugzilla would help
16:19:30 <olivier> patrick: not for now, it's rather small enough
16:19:49 <olivier> ... or maybe I should give it a try
16:20:28 <olivier> ... will think of it
16:21:43 <olivier> discussing whether it will change feedback
16:22:01 <olivier> ACTION: dom to create a "Test FAQ" component in the QA bugzilla
16:22:22 <dom> ACTION: patrick to put the existing Test FAQ issues in bugzilla
16:22:59 <olivier> relation between Test FAQ, TCDL and EARL
16:23:06 <olivier> karl: 
16:23:45 <olivier> karl: joining ERT to give a "QA" view in the process of developing EARL
16:25:33 <olivier> ... also renewed interest in TCDL
16:25:50 <olivier> Patrick: would like us to work on it...
16:26:04 <karl> q+
16:27:15 <olivier> karl: can (should) start small
16:27:38 <olivier> ... make it small, practical, fast
16:27:59 <olivier> Lofton: agree that this should be the next priority item in our queue
16:29:28 <olivier> ... would be good to clarify status of oct 2003 contribution on TCDL
16:33:29 <olivier> Patrick: would be very good to work on this once we're done with current business, good for us and good for testing in W3C at the moment
16:33:39 <olivier> dom: how should we proceed?
16:34:03 <olivier> dom, patrick: agree to get our current documents done, and then start work on this
16:36:29 <olivier> -> QA Handbook
16:37:29 <olivier> lofton: details what is left to work on
16:39:01 <olivier> lofton: schedule - can't start work before april
16:39:12 <olivier> ... so mid-june seems to be a possible target
16:42:24 <dom> [discussions on the QA process document template]
16:43:25 <dom> tim: the templates were very useful for the various WGs I have been working with
16:44:13 <olivier> lynne: there are startup guides documents  - maybe we could add templates to some of those
16:44:43 <olivier> dom: tied to idea of QA Framework primer
16:45:56 <olivier> ... it has a lot of information, but could be re-organized
16:46:05 <olivier> ... too overwhelming for a primer
16:46:38 <karl> q+
16:46:53 <olivier> dom projecting http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qaframe-primer
16:48:40 <olivier> karl: would be really good to make progress on primer, since groups always have the same kind of questions
16:49:10 <olivier> ... they don't know if there are places that hold answers, or part of
16:51:26 <olivier> dom: we could make a standard set of slides to present the primer to new groups
16:52:12 <olivier> ACTION: dom to send link to slideset used for CDF presentation
16:52:54 <olivier> ACTION: dom to create a standard set of slides to present the primer to new groups - by ~ march 10
16:54:52 <olivier> Tim: asks where groups would find that from our QAWG page
16:55:00 <olivier> dom: there is the QA activity page
16:55:09 <olivier> ... but would be good to add something to QA WG page
16:55:21 <olivier> ACTION: dom to add pointer to primer in QAWG homepage
17:00:13 <olivier> Spec GL: different choices for next transition
17:00:25 <olivier> ... we already have (or will have?) implementations
17:01:19 <olivier> PR or CR
17:01:24 <dom> -> http://www.w3.org/QA/2004/12/reports-list-table SpecGL Implementation Report
17:01:38 <olivier> (kark explains what PR and CR are)
17:03:54 <olivier> xml:id is a real usage of specGL
17:04:07 <olivier> ... we could go to PR directly, and get to REC rapidly
17:04:47 <olivier> dom note other similar documents (webarch, charmod) skipped CR
17:13:32 <olivier> discussing comments (received recently and which we will probably receive soon from xslt)
17:14:08 <olivier> breaking for lunch
17:14:18 <olivier> back at 13:15
17:14:37 <Zakim> -Karl
17:14:46 <Zakim> -Constellation316
17:14:47 <Zakim> QA_QAWG(TP)8:30AM has ended
17:14:49 <Zakim> Attendees were Constellation316, Karl
17:14:49 <olivier> zakim, bye
17:14:50 <Zakim> Zakim has left #qa
17:14:57 <olivier> rrsagent, bye
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> I see 8 open action items:
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to send a mail to chairs@ , pointing to matrix, inviting to discussion in www-qa [1]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T15-05-13
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: karl to send ideas for extensibility section of ViS [2]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-04-54
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Patrick to give list of examples we are looking for  (Test FAQ) [3]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-14-50
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to create a "Test FAQ" component in the QA bugzilla [4]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-22-01
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: patrick to put the existing Test FAQ issues in bugzilla [5]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-22-22
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to send link to slideset used for CDF presentation [6]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-52-12
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to create a standard set of slides to present the primer to new groups - by ~ march 10 [7]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-52-54
17:14:57 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to add pointer to primer in QAWG homepage [8]
17:14:57 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/03-qa-irc#T16-55-21