See also: IRC log
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2006/tests/process
<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Mar/0026.html
cs: considering outcomes of review, added bugs we could discover
<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Apr/0003.html
cs: when do we get back to submitter of sample?
<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Apr/0023.html
vk: is this shown in structure document?
saz: waiting for group agreement before adding to flowchart
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Apr/0023.html
RESOLUTION: accept flowchart from <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Apr/0023.html>
cv: send to WCAG?
saz: we don't know when they'll get back
cv: question about level of improvement when we get things back
saz: major improvement = reject (send it back
and redo)
... moderate improvement situation, do we edit, or send back?
cv: what counts as each?
saz: minor is punctuation, editorial, easily
done
... anything more substantial involves more work; suggest asking author to
take time to fix
... so we can focus on reviewing other test samples, rather than fixing
cs: how do we communicate with author?
saz: as simply as possible
cv: what is threshold for making change vs sending back?
saz: suggest chair discretion based on group member availability
<shadi> ACTION: change "minor improvment" to "reject", and address chair's discretion in the moderate decision [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01]
<shadi> ACTION: SAZ change "minor improvment" to "reject", and address chair's discretion in the moderate decision [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action02]
<shadi> ACTION: SAZ add item in content review for specName [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action03]
cv: BenToWeb reviewed TCDL
... want to make changes, unsure of priority for W3C
... suggest RDF version
saz: would like to discuss offline
cv: like it though not sure now is right time
ci: prefer RDF, and TCDL not generic right
now
... would like to solve those two problems at once, but it needs
resources/time
mc: think it's time to focus on test case development, if TCDL works acceptably just go ahead
vk: want improved version, but agree to proceed with test case development
saz: check with ERT, as the WG as a whole would probably be involved
<shadi> ACTION: SAZ bring this discussion to ERT WG to check for interest/resources [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action04]
mc: also notes that WCAG WG getting notably closer to point they need a good set of test samples to consume (though don't know exactly when still)
<shadi> RESOLUTION: TSD TF more interested in developing test samples than revisiting the metadata at this point in time
http://www.w3.org/2007/02/20-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01
http://www.w3.org/2006/tsdtf/TestSampleStatusList
cs: currently, 2 through structure, 1 through
content review
... some issues discussed on list, appear addressed
... need email address of submitter to communicate about issues on submitted
samples
cv: will create BenToWeb email alias for purpose
<scribe> ACTION: CS to compile list of issues that came out of test sample reviews and check if/where they were addressed. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action05]
http://www.w3.org/2007/02/27-tsdtf-minutes.html#action05
<scribe> ACTION: Carlos to "flood the task force with tests" coordinating with BenToWeb authors [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/02-tsdtf-minutes.html#action06]