Hi, Maciej- Thanks for the feedback.
Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 2/10/10 8:10 PM):
Some comments: - I would like to suggest the name "Web Messaging" for the postMessage / MessageChannel deliverable.
Done.
- I think the "Other Specifications" section should be clear on the right process for adopting new deliverables without having to recharter. I think we want a process that is flexible but that retains transparency and accountability. I like the idea of writing requirements documents for these. Perhaps there should be some sort of review process for these requirements documents, in lieu of a full recharter cycle.
Sure, let's discuss this as a group to see what we are all comfortable with, and I will tighten up the language accordingly. Right now, I don't know exactly what else to say.
- I think errata for the existing DOM specs should be stated as in-scope. I believe we are the right group to do this, but it's better to be explicit. I think this would include even DOM specs where we may not plan to publish a whole new version.
Clarified.
- I think it's no longer necessary to cite the previous Web API and WAF charters. If we do cite a previous charter it should be the previous version of the Web Apps WG charter, It hink.
Corrected. Regards- -Doug Schepers W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
