Re: ACTION ITEM: Vote on Discretionary Items report by end-of-dayMonday (4/23)

[David_Marston@lotus.com]

Carmelo, thanks for being the first to vote and getting this moving.

You said this about the out-of-scope section:
>The words "out-of-scope" and "conformant" should not be in the same
>document.  I don't think we should even touch any
>"out-of-scope" items or ask questions about it.

I think that this document is about discretionary items foremost,
then the categories help us plan the test suite. The document will
also be sent to the W3C as an example of what you can find in a
Recommendation when you look hard enough. At the QA Workshop, I
contended that future Working Groups should be producing a list of
discretionary items as an appendix, something to be expected with
every Recommendation. Having to generate this as outsiders has
slowed us down somewhat.

As for not even asking the questions: I worry that we may need to
know some of that information to ensure that certain in-scope test
cases properly avoid the discretionary areas. But we should wait
for the rest of the Committee to vote before looking deeper into
alternative approaches. I hope Carmelo's vote and this message will
stimulate the rest of you to vote!
.................David Marston