On Jan 19, 2010, at 3:39 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On Jan 19, 2010, at 3:05 PM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Arthur Barstow <[email protected]
> wrote:
Nikunj would like to move the Indexed Database API spec to Last
Call Working Draft (LCWD):
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebSimpleDB/
If you have any comments, please send them to [email protected]
by February 2.
Note the Process Document states the following regarding the
significance/meaning of a LCWD:
[[
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#last-call
Purpose: A Working Group's Last Call announcement is a signal that:
* the Working Group believes that it has satisfied its relevant
technical requirements (e.g., of the charter or requirements
document) in the Working Draft;
* the Working Group believes that it has satisfied significant
dependencies with other groups;
* other groups SHOULD review the document to confirm that these
dependencies have been satisfied. In general, a Last Call
announcement is also a signal that the Working Group is planning to
advance the technical report to later maturity levels.
]]
Additionally, a LCWD should be considered feature-complete with all
issues resolved.
If there are other groups that should be asked for comments, please
forward this email to them or identify the group(s).
-Regards, Art Barstow
We (Google) support this LC publication.
We would, however, like time to gather meaningful experience with
the spec before the last call review period ends. We expect we'll
have this experience by the end of May. Would it be permissible to
have a 4 month LC review period to facilitate this?
We at Apple are also in reviewing the spec and would also like
additional time to review.
How is the review coming along? It would be useful to get incremental
feedback and comments rather than a large set all at once. Does Apple
have an ETA for completing the review?
It doesn't matter that much to us if the review time is before or
during Last Call, but we definitely can't do a meaningful review by
February 2, and therefore cannot really sign off by that date on
whether the document has satisfied relevant technical requirements,
is feature-complete, and has all issues resolved.
It would really help if we can all check whether IndexedDB satisfies
relevant technical requirements. Besides inverted indexes, I have
ruled out any other feature requests that seem to expand the scope of
this spec without commensurate benefits.
(As far as I can tell the document is less than 4 months old as an
Editor's Draft and is about 60 pages long, so I hope it is
reasonable to ask for some reasonable amount of review time.)
Regards,
Maciej
