|Date:||Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:05:26 -0500|
|User-agent:||Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (Windows/20060909)|
The WASP is now interested in developing a kind of curriculum framework to help lecturers into their teaching.
Think of it an aggregator of observations made by a number of different tools.
It has been decided to create the QA Weblog, because it doesn't reach necessary the same public than people reading mailing-list or using the wiki. We have to make very clear that it's not a way to collect issues about Web architecture document itself.
The document defines a minimal set of metadata elements that can usefully be applied to tests that are intended for publication within a test suite.
Often the chosen criteria will be to have two interoperable implementations of each feature.
On the basis of this test case and its implementation, the specification prose will be written. We wanted to see how the community would react, but anyone can talk about it or advertize it. The framework will have to give hints on strategies for change.
We have to define ways of organizing the QA IG and support the QA IG objectives.
Her time is too limited. So that people can not only use it but adapt it to their own needs.
Patrick Curran has proposed to take her role. We are testing a prototype internally, and will make it public in the days or weeks to come.
We published it quickly.
If we identify a discussion that would make a good contribution for the wiki, we might ask the person to prepare a contribution for the weblog. That would be a rare sight, but it's not a fantasy. It should be done in coordination with one or two Working Groups and in the context of a practical use. What software is safe? We published it quickly. And all this can be done in an open field, and start an open debate. What software is safe?
At the time of the publication, it was mentionned that a schema could be useful to help implementers to use it in their tools.
This has its own limits and issues but gives a good starting point.
Software is developed upon technologies that are freely accessible and implementable on a royalty free basis. Like old-fashioned pre-cable TV advertising. It has been decided to create the QA Weblog, because it doesn't reach necessary the same public than people reading mailing-list or using the wiki.
Yet, The Web community often voices two completely opposite opinions. How can users determine these qualities? When there will be issues which seems more difficult to overcome, we will explain the solution we have found and adopted to solve them.
Having a summary of all discussions which have been done for this specific topic would be very useful and could serve as a QA Findings.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|