15:56:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #qa
15:56:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-irc
15:56:36 <dom> Meeting: QA Working Group Teleconference
15:56:39 <dom> Chair: Karl Dubost
15:56:50 <dom> Scribe: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux
15:56:53 <dom> ScribeNick: dom
15:57:24 <dom> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0102.html
15:57:38 <dom> agenda+ F2F in Dublin
15:57:45 <dom> agenda+ SpecGL issues
15:58:58 <lofton> lofton has joined #qa
16:00:07 <dom> zakim, call dom-617
16:00:07 <Zakim> ok, dom; the call is being made
16:00:08 <Zakim> QA_QAWG()11:00AM has now started
16:00:09 <Zakim> +Dom
16:00:11 <karl> zakim, call karl-work
16:00:11 <Zakim> ok, karl; the call is being made
16:00:46 <karl> zakim, drop karl-work
16:00:46 <Zakim> sorry, karl, I do not see a party named 'karl-work'
16:01:13 <karl> zakim, call karl-work
16:01:13 <Zakim> ok, karl; the call is being made
16:01:20 <karl> hmmmm
16:01:28 <dom> try the web dialout
16:01:33 <Zakim> +MSkall/LynneR
16:02:05 <Zakim> +[IBMCambridge]
16:02:08 <Zakim> +Patrick
16:02:18 <karl> On queue are: Karl-Work [16:01:55Z]
16:02:41 <dom> Zakim, [IBMCambridge] is DaveMarston
16:02:41 <Zakim> +DaveMarston; got it
16:02:49 <lofton> zakim, call lofton-home
16:02:49 <Zakim> ok, lofton; the call is being made
16:02:51 <Zakim> +Lofton
16:02:56 <karl> zakim, call karl-work
16:02:56 <Zakim> ok, karl; the call is being made
16:03:41 <Zakim> +MSkall.a
16:03:59 <dom> Regrets: Richard Kennedy
16:04:03 <Zakim> +Dimitris_Dimitriadis
16:04:15 <Zakim> +Tim_Boland
16:05:03 <Zakim> +Karl
16:05:22 <dom> Zakim, take up agendum 1
16:05:22 <Zakim> agendum 1. "F2F in Dublin" taken up [from dom]
16:05:49 <dom> dom: anybody prefering July vs August?
16:06:04 <dom> patrick: I don't have a preference
16:06:11 <dom> ... equivalent wrt hosting too
16:06:19 <dom> dimitris: I'd prefer Aug 9-11
16:06:23 <dom> dom: so would I
16:06:47 <dom> tim: this would impact our timetable wrt end of charter, since we're moving it back
16:08:25 <dom> RESOLVED: we're moving the meeting to Aug 9 til Aug 11
16:08:42 <dom> zakim, close this agendum
16:08:42 <Zakim> agendum 1 closed
16:08:43 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
16:08:45 <Zakim> 2. SpecGL issues [from dom]
16:08:46 <dom> zakim, take up next agendum
16:08:46 <Zakim> agendum 2. "SpecGL issues" taken up [from dom]
16:09:28 <dom> Topic: Issue 995 "old potential issues"
16:09:42 <dom> Lofton: I thought I had to review them by April 4th
16:09:47 <dom> ... I haven't done it yet
16:10:36 <dom> Topic: Issue 983
16:11:18 <dom> karl: need of an example demonstrating the use of an ICS as part of a conformance claim
16:11:23 <dom> ... didn't find exact examples
16:11:31 <dom> ... but ATAG 1.0 is close enough
16:11:48 <dom> ... since they require to explain what implementers have not implemented
16:12:01 <dom> ... so we can either change our requirements so that ATAG works
16:12:13 <dom> ... or make it an example with reservations
16:13:14 <dom> ... UAAG is another similar example
16:13:24 <dom> ... see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0104.html
16:14:04 <dom> dom: we could use them as "could be better" examples
16:14:30 <dom> karl: but is what we recommend really better?
16:15:20 <dom> ... isn't it enough to simply list what hasn't been implemented?
16:15:34 <dom> dom: I think the point of the GP is to have a formalized way to express these data
16:15:49 <dom> ... not a strong supporter of this GP, so probably not the best input
16:16:05 <dom> patrick: I think it is useful to require it, it's useful information
16:16:38 <dom> karl: so, let's add them as 2 examples, saying we recommend to require a link to the fulled ICS
16:16:51 <dom> s/fulled/fulfilled/
16:17:07 <dom> ... and that the examples are the 1st steps into that direction
16:17:46 <dom> lynne: are we going to include our own example, with SpecGL?
16:17:52 <dom> ... this would be an exact example
16:19:07 <dom> ... linking to a completed ICS of SpecGL for SpecGL, and showing it as an example of a claim using an ICS
16:19:32 <dom> karl: we need a volunteer to actually fill the ICS, as acurately as possible
16:19:47 <dom> ... this can only be done when the spec is edited as final
16:20:47 <dom> lynne: depends on when this needs to be done
16:21:02 <dom> ... can we leave this open until when the doc is ready?
16:21:16 <dom> ... I can't commit to it now, but maybe later
16:21:52 <dom> ... that's part of the TAG comments
16:22:07 <dom> karl: let's record in the issue that this isn't resolved until the ICS is filled
16:22:38 <dom> RESOLVED: we'll publish a fullfiled ICS for SpecGL and use it as an example for the relevant GP
16:23:10 <dom> tim: how does the ATAG conformance levels fit in our SpecGL view?
16:23:28 <dom> karl: ATAG's conformance model is pretty complex, using atomic details
16:23:44 <dom> ... the ICS just needs to respect what the spec says
16:23:57 <dom> ... so an ATAG ICS can be filled with multiple levels
16:25:53 <dom> tim: when claiming conformance to a certain level, you declare N/A for items in other levels
16:26:20 <dom> ... but sometime, people use it as a way to show where they are in the process of getting to this and this level, plus some other items they may have met
16:26:27 <dom> ... important as a marketing tool
16:27:09 <dom> lynne: when claiming conformance to a level, you should only list the relevant checkpoints in your ICS
16:28:04 <dom> ... it's up to the spec authors to decide how their ICS is organized wrt profiles, levels, ...
16:28:12 <dom> ... I don't think there are wrong answers on that topic
16:28:38 <dom> tim: just mentioning that often, an ICS can be used outside of a conformance claim
16:28:59 <dom> ... it may still have value out of a conformance claim, e.g. as a marketing opportunity
16:29:39 <dom> Lofton: I still dispute that using an ICS is in fact still making a claim
16:30:37 <dom> ... we shouldn't bother about how marketing uses an ICS
16:31:40 <dom> [same ole discussion restarting]
16:33:05 <dom> RESOLVED: We'll also use ATAG and UAAG as part of our example for including an ICS as part of a conformance claim (issue 983)
16:33:07 <dom> Topic: Issue 1041 - Conformance is not a yes/no proposition (wrt filling an ICS)
16:33:31 <dom> Topic: Issue 1058 New Numbering Structure
16:33:45 <dom> karl: I've integrated the new numbering scheme in the Editors version of SpecGL
16:33:55 <dom> ... unless anybody objects, we should close that issue
16:34:04 <dom> dom: sounds good to me
16:34:08 <dom> lynne: to me too
16:34:26 <dom> karl: dom, can you use an XSLT to create the ToC for the document?
16:34:28 <dom> dom: sure
16:34:36 <dom> karl: also, we'll need a new ICS for the document
16:35:17 <dom> ACTION dom: to update his XSLT stylesheets to create a ToC and ICS for the editors version
16:35:34 <dom> karl: also, should we publish the correspondance table as an appendix?
16:35:48 <dom> ... so that people used to the old numbering scheme can find their ways
16:36:17 <dom> dom: I don't think it's useful to have in the document
16:36:24 <dom> ... what about linking it from the Changelog?
16:36:43 <dom> ACTION kar: to create the correspondance table between old and new numbering in QA space and link it from changelog
16:36:50 <dom> s/kar/karl/
16:37:05 <dom> RESOLVED: issue 1058 is accepted as closed
16:37:27 <dom> Topic: Issue 1041 - Conformance is not a yes/no proposition (wrt filling an ICS)
16:37:42 <dom> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0085 Lynne's proposal
16:37:51 <dom> karl: we need to get consensus on this issue
16:38:59 <dom> lynne: I agreed with some part of Lofton's comments wrt implemented/tested
16:39:40 <dom> lofton: I still think it's absurd to work around conformance claims and ICS
16:42:14 <dom> [and again, discussion on whether an ICS can be used for anything else but conforming claim]
16:43:18 <dom> ... I disagree with our approach, and I don't think what lynne suggested reflects what was decided
16:44:41 <dom> karl: I'm satisfied with Lynne's proposal, but would rather get real consensus on this
16:44:59 <dom> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0091.html lofton's counter proposal
16:45:23 <dom> lofton: I think Lynne's proposal is still better than nothing
16:46:22 <dom> RESOLVED: issue 1041 is resolved per Lynne's amended proposal
16:46:52 <dom> ACTION karl: to incorporate last changes from Lynne on ICS definition http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0092.html
16:47:05 <dom> Topic: Issue 1059 Specification definition
16:47:21 <dom> -> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1059 Issue 0159
16:47:30 <dom> s/0159/1059/
16:47:38 <lofton> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance+desc&bug_status=__open__&product=QA&content
16:50:20 <dom> karl: reading old and new definition
16:50:29 <dom> karl: reading old and new definition]
16:50:41 <dom> patrick, dave, tim: the ISO one reads better
16:50:46 <lynne> lynne has joined #qa
16:51:09 <lynne> specification - document that prescribes technical requirements to be fulfilled by a product, process or service
16:51:15 <lynne> From ISO Guide 2-4
16:51:45 <dom> RESOLVED: to use ISO's definition of "specification" for SpecGL and ViS, referencing ISO Guide 2-4
16:52:40 <dom> ACTION karl to update SpecGL -inline and glossary- and QA Glossary with ISO's def of spec, plus add a ref to it
16:53:15 <dom> Topic: issue 1144 rewording GP 2.3 to be less workflow oriented
16:53:50 <dom> -> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1160  rewording GP 2.3 to be less workflow oriented
16:53:59 <dom> s/1144/1160/
16:54:41 <dom> Dave: there was some discussion on the verbiage used for the good practice
16:55:21 <dom> karl: Agree with Dom that the proposed sentence was a bit long
16:55:41 <dom> -> http://www.w3.org/mid/OFDFB3C373.424196FF-ON85256FCB.0057CB2C@lotus.com Dave's latest proposal
16:55:54 <dom> dave: sent a proposal this morning in 9 (long) words "When imposing requirements by normative references, anticipate conformance dependencies. "
16:56:37 <dom> karl: what do you mean by "anticipate"?
16:56:50 <dom> dave: that you explains somehwere in your specs how the conformance models interact
16:57:06 <dom> karl: I think the 1st part is fine
16:57:13 <dom> ... but I don't think the 2nd one is testable
16:58:06 <dom> dom: we really need this to be about results in the spec vs process to go there
16:58:38 <dom> dave: issue is whether "provide" is strong enough
16:58:42 <dom> ... what about "address"
16:58:46 <dom> ...?
16:59:04 <dom> ... this makes it clear you intend to see something in the verbiage
16:59:52 <dom> RESOLVED: ex GP 2.3B reworded in "When imposing requirements by normative references, address conformance dependencies. "
17:00:58 <dom> RESOLVED: we adopt the rest of Dave's proposal as is for issue 1060
17:01:02 <dom> s/1060/1160/
17:01:30 <dom> Topic: next meeting
17:01:59 <dom> dom: chaired by Patrick, on Apr 4th; patrick will need to send the agenda since neither karl nor I are goign to be aroudn before that
17:02:04 <dom> ... (no meeting next week)
17:02:26 <dom> karl: I'll try to do as much work as possible this week on the document
17:02:32 <dom> ... but we need to work on the ICS
17:02:46 <Zakim> -MSkall/LynneR
17:02:47 <Zakim> -DaveMarston
17:02:48 <Zakim> -Patrick
17:02:50 <Zakim> -Dimitris_Dimitriadis
17:02:50 <dom> ACTION dimitris to develop a detailed implementation report for SpecGL
17:02:53 <Zakim> -Tim_Boland
17:02:55 <Zakim> -Karl
17:02:56 <dom> ACTION dimitris: to develop a detailed implementation report for SpecGL
17:02:58 <Zakim> -Lofton
17:03:00 <Zakim> -Dom
17:03:40 <Zakim> -MSkall.a
17:03:56 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were Dom, MSkall/LynneR, Patrick, DaveMarston, Lofton, MSkall, Dimitris_Dimitriadis, Tim_Boland, Karl
17:03:56 <Zakim> Zakim has left #qa
17:04:07 <dom> RRSAgent, make log public
17:04:13 <dom> RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:04:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-minutes.html dom
17:04:25 <dom> RRSAgent, make draft minutes
17:04:25 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make draft minutes', dom.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:04:34 <dom> RRSAgent, bye
17:04:34 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items:
17:04:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dom to to update his XSLT stylesheets to create a ToC and ICS for the editors version [1]
17:04:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-irc#T16-35-17
17:04:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: kar to to create the correspondance table between old and new numbering in QA space and link it from changelog [2]
17:04:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-irc#T16-36-43
17:04:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: karl to to incorporate last changes from Lynne on ICS definition http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa-wg/2005Mar/0092.html [3]
17:04:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-irc#T16-46-52
17:04:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: dimitris to to develop a detailed implementation report for SpecGL [4]
17:04:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/03/21-qa-irc#T17-02-56