Quality Analysis in Ballot

Since January 2010 WGM, V3 Publishing has extended Quality Analysis and Reporting as follows:

• Created domain-specific reports in order that each Faciulitator can focus on her/his area of responsibility
• Extended the metrics analyzed to include errors that lead to validation failures of the generated schemas or of the generated MIF files
• In ballot QA Report, flagged the "fatal errors" that cause validation errors vis-a-vis the "soft" errors (such as an undefined concept domain) that can be corrected by subsequent additions to the vocabulary content.
• Updated the transforms used to go from static model designs (in either "Visio xml" or "RoseTree hmd" formats) in order to eliminate those errors that can be detected during conversion and can be corrected algorithmically with no "decisions". (This reduced validation errors by 90%, when applied to the content of Ballot2010May.)
• In both Ballot2010May and NormativeEdition2010 (now assembled for electronic review) the domain-specific Quality Analysis Report was automatically added to the published domain, and integrated into the table-of-contents for that domain. Further, a "Note to Balloters" was added to Ballot2010May to call attention to these reports and to suggest that these might be used to support Negative votes.

Publishing directions for Ballot 2010SEP include:

• Seek a formal change to the GOM in order to allow the Publishing Committee to cast Negative votes (based on quality analysis) against ballots without having to register in the ballot pool.
• moving the quality analysis and related tools to the "desk-top" of the publishing facilitators in order that they can begin to implement continuous quality management;
• simplify the combined "generator/publishing" desk-top facility in order that it can be easily executed on a routine basis as content is developed.