Talk:DO-178B

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Contents 1 "with independence" ? 2 RTCA standard infobox 3 Objectives 4 Tools

[edit] "with independence" ?

Can those in the know please define or make into a reference the term "with independence", which is unclear which is clearly being used in some technical way. --Nil0lab 22:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I added a note in the article defining 'with indepedence', paraphrased from the standard. CoderGnome 17:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RTCA standard infobox

I've noticed that every article of category:RTCA standards has an infobox with some fields. I propose to make the following Template:RTCA standard:

{{{id}}}
{{{title}}}
Latest Revision	{{{date}}}
Prepared by	{{{author}}}

I don't know much about these standards, so maybe there are better names for each fields. Hope this helps --surueña 15:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you managed to implement this good. Nordby73 21:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've finally made the {{RTCA standard}}, but with some minor changes in the wikicode due to web accessibility reasons. --surueña 22:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

{{{id}}}

{{{title}}}
Latest revision	{{{date}}}
Prepared by	{{{author}}}

I like the template. I had originally intended to do one myself, but as a WikiNovice, the process for submitting a template and getting it approved looked intimidating, so I just put in the direct formatting.

The color scheme is taken from the cover of the hard copy standards. They are published in two tones of green, and I used the same color scheme in the infobox, so it looks like the cover of the standard.

I am curious about the web accessibility issue. It looks like you omitted the background color for the document number. What web accessibility issue does that address, and in what way? Aarky 05:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Aarky. I made some changes to the infobox code because data tables should employ the structural elements (i.e. table caption and table headers) to allow voice browser "understand" each element.

However, I must say that those changes were wrong from the web accessibility POV because infoboxes are layout tables and not data tables. And thererefore accessible infoboxes should not use any of those structural elements, otherwise the user agent will recognize they as data tables. See the differences at Wikipedia:Accessibility#Tables.

I have now fixed the template (i.e. I have reverted to your code :-), and added your comment about where the color scheme was taken. Also, would you like to know how a color blind Wikipedia user will see the template? Go to http://www.vischeck.com/vischeck/vischeckURL.php and try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B and also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page . They are both OK. Best regards --surueña 14:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Objectives

Could anyone precise the objectives per DAL, please? ramtam 22:42, 03 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you please specify what you mean by DAL? Nordby73 18:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

DAL = Design Assurance Level. 22:14, ramtam 20 Aug 2006 (UTC)

I guess DAL is the same as software level. Nordby73 21:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tools

I am not sure that Simulink from the Mathworks really belongs to the category software development tools for DO-178B software. As far as I know, they do not provide anything you can claim credit for in front of certification authorities. Am I wrong somewhere or should this entry be moved to another section or simply removed ? Aubanel 14:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I vote for removal. Nordby73 21:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

As a random web surfer, I would suggest that the entire section on tools be removed.. Although not totally irrelevant, this is almost becoming a list of advertisements, and doesn't inform readers about what DO 178B is.

I also vote for removal of the entire section. I agree with the previous poster that this is looking like a list of advertisements, many of which have tenuous connection DO-178B.Aarky 11:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I replaced the list with a dmoz template. I guess dmoz needs an update now. Petter73 21:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

SQA is for sure part of DO-178B, but not each and every SQA tool is usable in a DO-proces. As a reader, I'd be more interested in a list of COTS tools that have been qualified (provide a list of sample programs) as development tools or verification tools w.r.t. DO-178B for level A (opt B). Aubanel 23:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)