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

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

| 1. Do you agree that all the items listed as "Testable" belong there?
|    If not, state your objections.

Yes.

| 2. Do you agree that all the items listed as "Testable Discretionary
|    Items to Postpone" are testable? Do you agree that they should be
|    postponed? If not, state your objections.

Yes.

| 3. Do you agree that all the items listed as "Acknowledged But Not
|    Testable" belong there? (These items would go on the questionnaire,
|    but associated test cases would always be excluded. There are some
|    tests that can use generated IDs, nodes from multiple documents, or
|    output HTML character entities without running afoul of these items,
|    so those cases would not be flagged.)
|    If not, state your objections.

Seems ok.

| 4. Do you agree that all the items listed as "Out of Scope" belong
|    there, given clarification (G) above? If not, state your objections.

Ok.

| 5. Do you agree that we have asked for enough information for test
|    cataloging, suite rendition, and use of the suite by a test lab?
|    If not, please ELABORATE.


I think so.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@East.Sun.COM    | To others we are not ourselves but a
XML Standards Engineer       | performer in their lives cast for a part
Technology Development Group | we do not even know we are
Sun Microsystems, Inc.       | playing.--Elizabeth Bibesco