This document introduces a common framework for enhancing the quality
practices of the W3C Working Groups in the areas of specification editing,
production of test materials, and coordination efforts with internal and
external groups. It presents introductory, roadmap, and orientation
information for the Framework document family of the Quality Assurance (QA) Activity. This is the
first of the family of QA Framework documents, which includes the other
existing or in-progress specifications: Process & Operational Guidelines;
Specification Guidelines; and, Technical Guidelines.
This document is a W3C Working Draft, made available by the W3C Quality
Assurance Activity for discussion on the QA email discussion list.
This version incorporates the discussions at the first QA face-to-face,
plus subsequent QA WG teleconferences, and supersedes all previous drafts.
This version still has minor editorial issues, flagged by "@@", (almost) all
of which are needed external links. This version is intended as the last WG
review version before final editing for first public working draft (FPWD).
Publication of this document does not imply endorsement by the W3C, its
membership or its staff. This is a draft document and may be updated,
replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to
use W3C Working Drafts as reference material or to cite them as other than
"work in progress".
Please send comments to www-qa@w3.org,
the publicly
archived list of the QA Interest Group. Please note that any mail sent to
this list will be publicly archived and available, do not
send information you wouldn't want to see distributed, such as private
data.
Table of contents
1. About this QA framework
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Why do we need a QA framework?
1.3 The Framework is for the WGs
1.4 The Framework goals
2. QA resources
2.1 Expertise & consultancy
2.2 Technical assets
3. Structure
& content of Framework documents
3.1 Applicable domain
3.2 Document orientation & structure
3.3 Normative guidelines
3.4 Terminology
3.5 Documents roadmap
3.5.1 Contents
3.5.2 Introduction
3.5.3 Process & Operational Guidelines
3.5.4 Specification Guidelines
3.5.5 Technical Guidelines
4. Guide to using Framework documents
4.1 Target audience
4.1.1 For the overall Framework
4.1.2 For the Introduction
4.1.3 For the guideline parts
4.2 Framework primer and guide
4.2.1 First step -- charter commitment
4.2.2 Set up processes & logistics
4.2.3 Planning and writing the specification
4.2.4 Reviewing and progressing the specification
4.2.5 Designing and building test materials
4.2.6 Publication of test materials
4.2.7 Specification publication and beyond
4.2.8 Life after WG
5. Conformance
6. Acknowledgments
7. References
1. About this QA framework
1.1 Introduction
This document introduces a common framework for promoting and facilitating
the quality practices of the W3C Working Groups. It presents introductory,
roadmap, and orientation information for the Framework document family of the
Quality Assurance (QA) Activity.
The documents in this family collectively aim to provide the W3C Working
Groups with resources and tools for all phases and aspects of their quality
and conformance activities,
- planning and process setup,
- writing better, more testable specifications,
- coordination with internal and external groups,
- and ultimately to building or acquiring conformance test materials.
The structure and content of the Framework documents family are detailed
in the later chapter, "The QA Framework
documents," but the main (root) documents are:
- "QA Framework: Introduction" (this document) -- a roadmap and primer to
the Framework document family;
- "QA Framework: Process & Operational Guidelines" -- process,
organizational, and operational guidelines for groups starting
development or acquisition of conformance test materials;
- "QA Framework: Specification Guidelines" -- guidelines for writing
better, more testable Technical Reports;
- "QA Framework: Technical Guidelines" -- detailed technical guidelines
for test materials, i.e., for building test suites (TS) and test tools
themselves
Some of these documents have an additional associated "Examples &
Techniques" document, which contain detailed, technology-specific methods and
examples for implementing the guidelines.
1.2 Why do we need a QA framework?
The ultimate mission of W3C is "Leading the Web to its full potential...",
and W3C's many active working groups contribute towards this goal, in large
part, by building a family of high-quality Web standards. These standards are
the building blocks of a technical architecture to maximize the Web's
potential.
Most would agree that the writing of the standard is not, in itself, the
end purpose of the WGs. It is a means to achieve the real end: the success of
the standardized technology in practice and practical application. One
measure of the success that can be applied to most Web standards is a set of
complete, correct, high-quality, interoperable implementations that actually
realize the functionality of the standard.
In the past few years, several WGs have discovered that the early
production of test materials (TM) has been a major contributor to the success
of their standards. The benefits of test materials work are several-fold, but
a couple of the big benefits are: early detection and correction of
unintentionally vague, contradictory, or unimplementable language in the
technical reports (TRs) [@@link-to-/TR/@@]; and, a solid basis for the
development of the interoperable implementations demonstration required by
the W3C Process Document.
- Better specifications are inherently more implementable;
- and, better implementations are our ultimate goal.
The individual conformance test materials efforts of the Working Groups
have in several cases been inspired and on target, in others have been
perfunctory or rudimentary. Even amongst the best efforts, however, there is
little uniformity in the quality-control principles, methodologies, or even
such basics as terminology. And even those WGs which have resources
sufficient to their QA goals have effectively had to re-invent their
processes, operational framework, and technical bits from scratch. Just
figuring out where to start -- researching the numerous existing TS
activities -- can be a hurdle.
This defines the mission of our QA Activity. QA aims assist the WGs by
assembling and organizing the best of a body of good practice, defining a
framework, and providing a roadmap for the working groups. These
best-practice guides should dramatically ease the job of planning and
implementing QA projects within the Working Groups.
1.3 The Framework is for the WGs
The last underscores a key reality of improved quality practices
associated with W3C technical reports. QA is not a comprehensive service
proffered to the Working Groups, nor is QA an aspect of WG operation that can
be exported to an external entity. Nor do quality practices comprise a
mandate imposed on the Working Groups from without, notwithstanding that
higher expectations are evolving for the Working Group QA deliverables and
for the quality of the products of the WGs in general.
QA is properly an intergral part of the efforts of each Working Group.
Each WG will provide the majority of the resources needed to meet its QA
commitments. The QA Activity provides this Framework, as well as other tools
and assets, to aid and guide the WG efforts.
Therefore the QA Framework is for everyone who is involved with the work
of W3C's Working Groups. Some part of these Framework documents should be
useful and helpful to anyone who is an active participate in generating such
deliverables -- specifications and conformance test materials alike -- as
well as anyone who is involved in assessing or evaluating such
deliverables.
1.4 The Framework goals
Foremost amongst the purposes of defining a common QA Framework is the
principal goal of the QA Activity itself:
- to improve the quality of W3C standards' implementations in the
field.
As an integral part of the working modes of the WGs, QA is ideally a
development context which is applicable to a spec's development from its
earliest stages through completion. This Framework provides a collection of
best-practice principles and guidelines, which span the life of WG activities
from the identification of QA deliverables in the WG charters, through
post-REC and possibly even post-WG maintenance.
While some might perceive QA projects as a regrettable drain on WG
resources, there is ample experience, both within W3C as well as other
standards venues, that shows significant improvement to the products of the
WGs. This equates to a sound business case for the early investment of
resources -- the cost in resources is more than offset by the benefits of
more implementable and better implemented Recommendations. In fact, in some
cases there could be a net resource gain, by dodging problems that would be
costly to fix if detected late in a specification's development process.
This Framework document family should provide to those undertaking quality
assurance projects:
- a step-by-step guide to QA process and operational setup, as well as to
technical development;
- and, access to resources that the QA Activity makes available to assist
the WGs in all aspects of their quality practices.
More specific goals include:
- to encourage the employment of quality practices in the development of
the specifications from their inception through their deployment;
- to foster a common look-and-feel for test suites, validation tools,
harnesses, and results reporting;
- to encourage development and use of a common, shared set of tools and
methods for building test materials.
2. QA resources
A variety of resources are provided by the QA Activity, including:
- common QA Glossary [QA-GLOSSARY];
- QA Taxonomy description [TAXONOMY];
- "The Matrix" [MATRIX], which is a definitive
survey of existing QA practice;
- Notes (white papers) on QA-related topics;
- this QA Framework document family;
- the Issues List of the QA WG [ISSUES-LIST];
- expertise and consultancy;
- technical assets.
A comprehensive survey of the resources of QA Activity is beyond the scope
of this document, and may be located on the Working Group (QA WG) and
Interest Group (QA IG) Web pages. However the last two items above are
pertinent to other parts of these Framework documents.
2.1 Expertise & consultancy
The QA Working Group expects to have access to considerable expertise on a
spectrum of QA topics, methods, and techniques. One key aim of the QA
Activity is to make this expertise available to the Working Groups, at least
on an as-needed (request) basis, as they plan and implement their conformance
and quality projects. The degree of participation of QA experts in WG
projects will likely be limited by QAWG staff resource constraints, but a
consultancy role should almost always be possible.
The Framework document, "QA Framework: Process & Operational
Guidelines", explores this topic in some detail, including:
- the nature of QAWG relationship to other Working Groups;
- level and degree of participation of QA WG experts in other WG
projects;
- and, means and mechanisms for managing WG requests for QA
assistance.
2.2 Technical assets
While the initial resources that the QA Working Group offers to other WGs
focuses heavily on the Framework documents and available consulting
expertise, it is intended that ongoing development within QA Activity will
result in a collection of commonly useful technical assets. Some anticipated
offerings include:
- XML-based test case description languages (TCDL) that can be applied or
adapted to diverse test suite projects.
- Scripts and transformation stylesheets to generate commonly needed TS
materials, harnesses, and documents from TCDLs.
- Grammars and methods for granular construction of specifications, as
well as tools and methods for management of testable assertions and even
(in some cases) automatic generation of tests.
- Templates for setting up project TS process documents, ../Test Web
sites, and other conformance project logistics.
- Standardized and routine procedures (including forms and scripts) for
WGs to manage the process of (external) test case submission, review, and
integration.
- Results reporting languages (e.g., EARL), plus methodologies and
specific tools for working with them.
3. Structure
& content of Framework documents
3.1 Applicable domain
Conformance test materials are being developed in an organizational
landscape within W3C (and without) which is characterized by:
- Working Groups range from just chartered, to mature, to
re-chartered;
- their specifications are at all different milestones in the Process, ranging from first Working Draft through
REC, through post-REC errata processing and subsequent-edition
publication;
- the appropriate conformance test materials range throughout the five
points of the QA taxonomy [TAXONOMY] -- content
validators (two flavors), test suites (two flavors) for products and
tools, and API testers;
- experience building test materials ranges from zero to significant;
- staffing resources are commensurate with required conformance
deliverables in some cases, but are inadequate in others;
- there are various combinations of intra-WG test materials development,
and development external to W3C.
These framework documents should be applicable and useful throughout this
diverse context.
3.2 Document orientation & structure
The Framework documents will utilize the style of guidelines and
verifiable checkpoints, similar to WAI standards such as WCAG [WCAG10]. The degree to which a simple cookbook guide is
achievable is complicated by the factors enumerated previously -- diversity
of potential test materials, as well as organizational diversity. Complexity
and diversity will be managed in the Framework document family by:
- stating the guidelines and checkpoints as much as possible with
general, cross-taxonomy and all-WG applicability;
- and, for each of the Framework's guideline documents, having an
associated "Examples & Techniques" document.
The guideline documents are closely linked to their respective "Examples
& Techniques" documents. The linked material explores, defines, and
presents examples of taxonomy-dependent implementations of checkpoints. This
model from the WAI standards has served well to manage diversity and
complexity.
These checkpoint technique documents are not intended to be a
comprehensive survey of existing W3C practice. That is the purpose of the QA
matrix [MATRIX]. That notwithstanding, several of the
conformance test efforts will be drawn upon for examples.
3.3 Normative guidelines
The Framework guidelines -- or more precisely, the checkpoints associated
with the guidelines -- comprise the individual conformance requirements of
these Framework documents. Each guidelines document contains a conformance
chapter which unambiguously defines conformance to the guidelines and
checkpoints.
These guidelines documents are being processed initially as Working
Drafts. Although their ultimate disposition is currently undecided, it is not
precluded that all or parts of these guidelines may ultimately be
incorporated (by reference) into the W3C Process Document [PROCESS], or may be processed to the status of W3C
Recommendation.
3.4 Terminology
The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" will be used as
defined in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Unusual terms in these framework documents are defined when first used,
and most generally useful QA-specific terms will eventually be in the QA
Glossary [QA-GLOSSARY].
3.5 Documents roadmap
3.5.1 Contents
The Framework document family includes:
- "QA Framework: Introduction" (this document)
- "QA Framework: Process & Operational Guidelines"
- "Process & Operational Techniques and Examples"
- "QA Framework: Specification Guidelines"
- "Specification Techniques and Examples"
- "QA Framework: Technical Guidelines"
- "Technical Techniques and Examples"
These documents are explained in the following subsections.
3.5.2 Introduction
- Overview of the W3C QA Activity
- Identification of a those QA resources which are integral to the
Framework document family
- Description of the structure and content of the Framework document
family
- Guide and Primer for how to use the Framework document family
This document is for everyone interested in QA within the W3C. Especially,
it serves as a first read for people with the following roles:
- WG chairs that need to start a QA-related project for their particular
specification
- WG members that need to understand what the commitment to QA is
about
- QA TS moderators, contacts, coordinators and editors
The introduction document serves as a starter for most QA-related
activities, especially as it contains pointers to more specific information
on particular steps of the QA process, both by examples and by linking to
that information explicitly.
3.5.3 Process & Operational Guidelines
This document pair is mainly to be read by people explicitly involved in
QA activities. This includes the roles mentioned above, as well as people
from the outside in case the QA activity is jointly launched or maintained.
It explicitly deals with the following:
- Process guidelines for QA-related activities -- especially for building
test suites and test tools -- including information about current W3C
processes
- Interdependencies between QA and other WGs in the W3C;
interdependencies between WGs in general as far as QA is concerned
- W3C information in both charter and non-charter form
- Where TS work should be done (addressed explicitly since many QA
activities and TS will not be owned, produced and maintained by the W3C
alone, but will rather be joint projects with other organizations)
- QA-realted communications
- Guidelines and experiences from QA-related work done in and outside of
the W3C to serve as examples of where TS ought to be done
- How to initiate a TS effort, establish a process if an applicable one
does not exist, producing, maintaining and releasing it
- Staffing questions related to TS and tools
- IPR questions
- How to deal with outside contributions, suitable both for W3C-internal
and external QA activites and TS; including, transferring and changing
ownership of an external tool or TS
This document family, which will be comprised of two documents, one with
principals and guidelines, the other with examples and pointers to existing
QA work, serves as a more detailed set of guidelines as far as principal and
technical questions are concerned. It should be considered a normative read
for people involved in launching, taking over, or maintaining QA-related
work.
3.5.4 Specification Guidelines
A document pair with guidelines, plus techniques and examples, for better,
more testable specifications.
Given the fact that many specifications are written and maintained in XML
form, it seems a good idea to think ahead and allow for easier generation of
TS schemata, tests, assertions about applying the specification in question
etc. There are examples (in particular the DOM Test Suite) where the language
used to describe the technology-specific tests are generated from the
specification itself. This is expected to become more and more frequent. In
order for Working Groups to provide for this, this document will deal with
guidelines for writing schemata for the specifications. By its general
nature, this is expected to be a central W3C activity.
In particular, these two documents contain information about:
- W3C specifications as far as testability and construction of
conformance test materials is concerned, including
- conformance clauses,
- enumeration of behaviors,
- identification and addressability of specification-specific
testable assertions
- profiles, levels, conformance claims
- optional features, extensions, etc
- Schemata used for writing specifications
- Schemata used for test extraction
- Schemata used for non-complete automatically generated frameworks
serving as the primer for a TS
3.5.5 Technical Guidelines
These two documents deal exclusively with questions related to
- Tools used to produce conformance test suites
- Technologies used in doing so (RDF, XSLT, DTD/Schema etc)
- Building or using harnesses for running the TS and generating relevant
results
- Principles and guidelines for general test suite design, test case
content, reporting etc.
- Principles and guidelines for issue tracking systems in TS production,
matrices of existing, expected and wanted tests and so forth
- Generation of more than one language binding, where applicable
- Using assertions to produce relevant tests that take into account the
particulars of the specific technology tested
4. Guide to using Framework documents
This chapter provides an introduction to the use of the Framework document
family. It addresses:
- what parts should be helpful according to a participant's role in WG
activities,
- a primer on getting started on the QA activities within the WGs, by
reference to the guidelines and techniques of the other parts.
4.1 Target audience
4.1.1 For the overall Framework
QA is properly an intergral part of the efforts of each Working Group. The
QA WG charter succinctly summarizes the point that has been made from the
earliest W3C conformance papers (@@link to tbl/dd paper in member
space?@@):
"[...] QA is to be considered a 'natural overhead' of any WG [...]. QA
will succeed only if every person inside W3C participates in it."
Some parts of these Framework documents should prove useful to everyone
involved with the work of W3C's Working Groups -- not only those WG members
specializing in conformance test materials, but all of a WG's participants,
and even external parties reviewing the products of the WGs.
4.1.2 For the Introduction
This first part, "Introduction", should be read by everyone involved with
the work of the WGs. In addition to reviewing the scope and goals of the QA
Activity, and QA activities within the WGs, it also provides a detailed
roadmap and guide to the Framework documents family.
As presently scoped, there will be seven documents in the Framework (see
"Documents Roadmap"). After the
"Introduction", those parts that will be useful to any individual WG
participant depends on the participant's role in the WG's work.
4.1.3 For the guideline parts
From a conformance and quality perspective, several roles are significant
out in a WG's activities. The following identification of roles incorporates
one principle from the "Process & Operational Guidelines" -- within a
Working Group, there will be a group (WG-TS) that is focused on conformance
test suites and tools. WG-TS consists of a subset of the WG members, and
possibly other W3C members from outside of the WG.
- all WG members
- For any (potential) WG member, the charter and QA-definition parts of
"Process & Operational Guidelines" (@@anchor-in-#2a@@) should be
helpful in understanding what the WG has committed to deliver.
Familiarity with the "Specification Guidelines" (@@#3a@@) will be
helpful to any member who participates in the advancement of the WG's
specifications to Recommendation.
- WG spec editors & authors
- As for all WG members, @@#2a@@ is useful. A good working
understanding of @@#3a@@ will be needed in order to satisfy the spec
guidelines and checkpoints, and "Specification Guidelines Techniques
and Examples" (@@#3b@@) should be a valuable resource in choosing
document structure, formats, and techniques that will facilitate
satisfying the requirements.
- WG chair
- As the person ultimately responsible for both the advancement of the
WG's specifications and the WG's QA projects, a familiarity with
@@#2a@@, @@#3a@@, and "Technical Guidelines" (@@#4a@@) will be
useful.
- WG-TS participant
- Those who are active in building the conformance test materials of
the WG will need a good working understanding of both @@#4a@@ and
"Technical Guidelines Techniques and Examples" (@@#4b@@). Because of
the close dependency of test materials on the functional
specifications, a good familiarity with @@#3a@@ and @@#3b@@ will also
be helpful.
- WG-TS moderator
- The person who manages the WG's QA projects should have good working
understandings of @@#3a@@, @@#3b@@, @@#4a@@, @@#4b@@. In addition,
knowledge of all of the process and logistical setup guidelines of
@@#2a@@ and techniques of @@#2b@@ are needed.
- non-WG spec reviewers
- Whether from other WGs, or the public at large, @@#3a@@ will be
helpful to those who review a WG's specifications.
- non-WG TM reviewers
- Whether from other WGs, or the public at large, reviewers of the test
materials of a WG should be familiar with @@#4a@@, and familiarity with
@@#4b@@ as well would facilitate a critical review.
- Reviewers of activity proposals & charters
- For those W3C members who will be reviewing Activity proposals and
proposed WG charters, and helping to form their AC representatives
positions, the charter- and deliverable-related requirements defined in
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ are helpful.
- QA Activity members
- Members of the QA WG are an expert resource for the W3C Working
Groups, and accordingly should be expert on all parts of the Framework;
members of the QA IG need thorough familiarity with all parts as well,
to effectively render some of the IG's chartered deliverables.
4.2 Framework primer and guide
This section examines use of the Framework documents from the perspective
of significant milestones in a WGs activities, from writing the charter
through publishing Recommendations, and building or acquiring test suites and
tools.
4.2.1 First step -- charter commitment
Because QA is considered to be an integral part of the activities of each
WG, each WG has to consider and commit to a set of QA deliverables. A
spectrum of possible commitments, and associated guidelines, is found in
"Process & Operational Guidelines", section "@@anchor-in-#2a@@".
If a WG is being newly formed, then the WG charter needs to document its
QA deliverables, just as it does all other WG deliverables. See
@@anchor-in-#2a@@. If a WG is being re-chartered, this case should be
considered the same as a newly formed WG -- the charter should document the
WG's committed set of conformance and test related deliverables.
For an already-chartered Working Group undertaking new QA projects, if
these deliverables are not documented in the charter already, then the W3C
Process Document [W3C-PROCESS] suggests that the charter should be amended to
document the new deliverables. Again, see @@anchor-in-#2a@@.
4.2.2 Set up processes & logistics
Once WG commitments to QA deliverables are made and documented in the
charter, the next step is to set up the processes and logistics that the WG
will use for managing its QA activities. These include, among other
things:
- test suite (QA) moderator;
- "/Test/" home page in the Working Groups Web space;
- -ts email discussion list;
- WG process document for QA;
- decisions about IPR and test materials.
See the sections (@@anchor-in-#2a@@) in "Process and Operational
Guidelines", about how to do this.
4.2.3 Planning and writing the specification
There is a very tight relationship between how the specification (Rec) is
written on the one hand, and on the other hand its testability and its
suitability as the foundation for interoperable implementations.
New specification. "Specification Guidelines" (@@#3a@@) should be applied
from very beginning. Among the key topics that authors and editors should
consult are:
- conformance clause
- normative language throughout
- granular grammar and testable assertions
- optional features, discretion, extensions
- profiles, levels, conformance claims
Consider the guidelines and checkpoints of "Specification Guidelines" even
at the stage of planning the structure and presentation style of the spec.
Along with W3C "pubrules" (@@link@@) and "Style Manual" (@@link@@), document
authors and editors should refer to the spec guidelines throughout, about
testable language, clarity, conciseness.
New "Edition" of specification. A new "Edition" of the same functional
level of a specification is typically used for incorporation of errata (e.g.,
XML 1.0 Second Edition). Normally, this should not be considered as a good
time to bring a specification for "Spec Guidelines" conformance, as the
latter could significantly disrupt and restructure the specification.
New "Version" of specification. A new "Version" of the specification
refers to a significant functional change and enhancement. This presents a
good opportunity to improve the testability and implementability of the
specification, as just described for new specifications.
4.2.4 Reviewing and progressing the specification
This stage in the specifications life has two significant aspects:
- the advancement of the specification to and beyond the first public
working draft (FPWD);
- and, the need to synchronize production of test suites and tools more
closely with the spec progression.
When the specification is published in TR space (@@link@@), then non-WG
W3C members and the general public begin to review and comment. Such
reviewers should consult and understand the material in "Specification
Guidelines" (@@#3a@@), in order to have an informed set of evaluation
criteria for the conformance, testability, and interoperability aspects of
the specification.
WG members and especially WG-TS members should refer to @@anchor-in-#2a@@
in the "Process & Operational Guidelines", regarding synchronization of
the test materials work with the spec progression. The project enters "The
Matrix" (@@link@@) at Last Call WD (if not sooner). Additionally, a de-facto
process convention is emerging, that there should be significant conformance
test materials at the stage of CR-exit/PR-commencement. This is the same
timing as the explicit process requirement of two interoperable
implementations.
4.2.5 Designing and building test materials
There are several scenarios for how the WG "builds" its conformance test
materials:
- design and build test cases and test tools in the WG, from scratch;
- import completed test materials from an outside group or
organization;
- assemble the test materials from contributed test cases and
materials.
In-WG build. Before starting the technical development, the WG-TS members
should be thoroughly familiar with the material in "Technical Guidelines"
(@@#4a@@). There is useful information for both high-level planning -- e.g.,
breadth-first Basic Effectivity versus fully detailed suite? -- as well as
specific technical detail for the building of individual test cases. Another
aspect of building test materials is an acceptance procedure for the
individual bits, as they are built. This is addressed in the section
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process & Operational Guidelines".
Import completed test materials. Several high-quality test suites have
been developed outside of the relevant W3C WG, and then transferred to the
WG. WG's which are considering such a transfer should refer to to
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process & Operational Guidelines". Clearly, the
quality of the candidate test materials should be carefully assessed, and for
this the "Technical Guidelines" (@@#4a@@) can provide useful assessment
criteria.
Assemble
contributions. Some test suites have been built by implementing processes to
assemble significant chunks of material from outside (or internal member)
contributions. The @@anchor-in-#2a@@ section of the "Process and Operational
Guidelines" addresses the steps needed to complete such a transfer. In
addition, there should be careful quality assessment of contributions, for
which "Technical Guidelines" (@@#4a@@) can be useful. Finally, there must be
procedures for submission, review, and integration of contributions, which
are described in the @@anchor-in-#2a@@ section of "Process & Operational
Guidelines".
4.2.6 Publication of test materials
Typically, a WG-TS group will want to publish releases of test materials,
particularly as the specification advances through its final stages (e.g.,
PR) towards Recommendation. Test material publication is addressed in
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ section of "Process & Operational Guidelines".
As soon as the test materials become public, then there is definite need
for a procedure to process challenges to correctness, make determinations,
and appeal decisions. This is addressed in @@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process
& Operational Guidelines".
Publication of test materials often comprises an implicit (or explicit)
invitation for contributions. The considerations described in "Assemble Contributions" are equally
applicable here.
4.2.7 Specification publication and beyond
When the specification reaches Recommendation, there is typically a
concurrent publication of the test materials. This might be considered a
"final" publication, or ongoing development may still be planned according to
one of the mechanisms discussed above. In any case, a maintenance procedure
must be in place for the test materials. Firstly, there are tie-ins between
approved spec errata and validity or applicability of particular tests --
mechanisms for this are discussed in "Technical Guidelines" @@#4a@@, and the
general process overview is discussed in @@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process and
Operational Guidelines". Secondly, there is the above-discussed need for both
challenge/review/appeal processes. Finally, even if WG-TS active development
of test materials ceases, it may be desired to continue to consider
submissions, review and integrate them per the guidelines of
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process & Operational Guidelines".
4.2.8 Life after WG
It is possible that the WG and WG-TS may disband after its charter
expires. This situation, and what to do about test materials, is discussed in
@@anchor-in-#2a@@ of "Process & Operational Guidelines".
5. Conformance
This introductory document to the Framework documents family is entirely
informative. It contains no conformance requirements. Therefore the concept
of conformance to this document is not applicable.
The guidelines documents of this Framework document family do contain
conformance requirements, and each such document contains a conformance
chapter with an unambiguous definition of conformance to the documents
guidelines and checkpoints.
6. Acknowledgments
The following QA Working Group and Interest Group participants have
contributed significantly to the content of this document:
- Selim Aissi (Intel)
- Daniel Dardailler (W3C),
- Dimitris Dimitriadis (Ontologicon)
- Karl DuBost (W3C),
- Peter Fawcett (RealNetworks),
- Kirill Gavrylyuk (Microsoft),
- Dominique Hazael-Massieux (W3C)
- Lofton Henderson (CGM Open),
- Ian Jacobs (W3C)
- David Marston (Lotus Development Corp),
- Olivier Thereaux (W3C),
- Lynne Rosenthal (NIST).
- Mark Skall (NIST)
- Andrew Thackrah (Open Group)
@@Any additions? Any deletions?@@
7. References
- ISSUES-LIST
- QA Activity Issues List,
maintained by the QA Working Group.
- MATRIX
- W3C-wide conformance activity survey covering all the WGs, "The Matrix".
- PROCESS
- W3C Process
Document, 19 July 2001.
- TAXONOMY
- QA Activity test
taxonomy, a classification scheme for conformance test
materials.
- QA-GLOSSARY
- Comprehensive glossary of QA terminology. (Under construction.)
- QAIG
- Quality Assurance Interest
Group of the W3C QA Activity.
- QAWG
- Quality Assurance Working
Group of the W3C QA Activity.
- RFC2119
- Key words for use in
RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels, March 1997.
- WCAG10
- Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines, version 1.0, W3C Recommendation, 5 May 1999.