OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] OOXML: So what *should* happen now?

Maybe it is considered old fashioned these days, but I'm accustomed to measuring the sufficiency of a quality review not by the number of defects found but by the coverage ratio of the thing being reviewed.  In other words, 3,549 errors from reviewing 20% of a standard may not be so good, but finding 200 errors from reading 100% of it may be very good, if those are the 200 most serious errors.

Have you developed any sense of the coverage of these comments?  My quick glance seems to indicate that Part 5 was not reviewed much.  Same for PresentationML.  I certainly know that my own review never got past the 20% mark for coverage.


Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote on 09/10/2007 08:01:32 AM:

> By the way, the most recent count I have on the number of issues raised
> on DIS 29500 is about 3549. I would imagine there would be many
> duplicates or groupings. So much for "no review"!
> I've quoted recent discussion on this list on my blog
> http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2007/09/on_error_rates_in_drafts_of_st.html
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS