XLink

Uniform resource name. A unique identifier that identifies an entity but doesn't tell where it is located. A system can use a URN to look up an entity locally before trying to find it on the Web. It also allows the Web location to change, while still allowing the entity to be found.

You can use the XPointer Framework with non-XML resources. This is especially effective when your resource is backed by some kind of a DBMS, or when you want to query a data model, such as RDF, and not the XML syntax of a representation of that data model.

The XPointer Framework provides an authoritative and extensible interpretation of the semantics of fragment identifiers for XML media types. However, HTTP does NOT transmit the fragment identifier as part of the HTTP request. Therefore XPointer is generally applied by the client, not by the server.

The XML Link Language specification, consisting of XLink and XPointer.

I developed a software quality methodology for Texas Instruments Software, which included Software Quality Assurance and Software Quality Control, with a particular focus on software projects using CASE tools. I conducted quality training, quality planning, process assessment/improvement and other consultancy assignments using this methodology

Systematic failure to carry out proper unit testing. OR inconsistency between the development/unit test environment and the system test environment. AND ALSO management failure to respond promptly to the situation with corrective and preventative action.

The part of a URL passed by an HTTP request to invoke a servlet. A URL path consists of the context path + servlet path + path info, where Context path is the path prefix associated with a servlet context of which the servlet is a part. If this context is the default context rooted at the base of the Web server's URL namespace, the path prefix will be an empty string. Otherwise, the path prefix starts with a / character but does not end with a / character.

XLink is thhe part of the XLL specification that is concerned with specifying links between documents.

Formally, the role is to make the inspection process or testing process visible, both to the participants (so they can see what they are achieving, how effective they are being) and to management (so that they can assess progress and risk). In practice, SQA personnel often need to act as facilitators or coaches. They are often regarded (wrongly) as the owners or custodians of the inspection or testing process, or even as the owners/custodians of the whole software process. Part of the training and mentoring for SQA personnel should address the difficult dilemma of how to be adequately engaged in the software process without being landed with the responsibility for it.

Yes

The most likely consequence is that the project will not deliver anything at all. Not because the lifecycle couldnt be made to work technically, but because it will fail to contain the political tensions between stakeholders.

It would depend on the culture and prior history of the organization, as well as the nature and source of the demand for software quality, but I have usually found it easier to get started with walkthroughs. In some cases, there is already a formal (but lapsed) procedure mandating either walkthroughs or inspections. In such cases, the first task is to unpick the reasons why the previous attempts have failed. Typically, past inspections have inspected the wrong things at the wrong times, using the wrong criteria at the wrong level of detail.

The main difference is what the two models tell you. ISO 9000-3 gives you a yes/no answer, whereas SEI SW-CMM gives you a more complex assessment. This implies different ways of using the models for SQA and process improvement.

Use the GQM approach to derive relevant metrics from personal and corporate goals. Select a small number of key metrics that will be directly relevant to project managers and/or software engineers. Put the metrics into the hands of the workers, as a tool for personal performance improvement.

A parser that ensures that an XML document is valid in addition to being well formed. See also parser.

Meaning 99.999997% perfect; only 3.4 defects in a million.

American Society for Quality Control