I support this publication. - Maciej
On Jul 6, 2010, at 7:19 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > Anne has now integrated the CR's exit criteria and text about security > considerations into the version proposed for CR: > > [[ > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/#crec > > Candidate Recommendation Exit Criteria > > To exit the Candidate Recommendation (CR) stage the following criteria must > have been met: > > 1. There will be at least two interoperable implementations passing all > test cases in the test suite for this specification. An implementation is to > be available (i.e. for download), shipping (i.e. not private), and not > experimental (i.e. intended for a wide audience). The working group will > decide when the test suite is of sufficient quality to test interoperability. > > 2. A minimum of six months of the CR stage will have elapsed. This is to > ensure that enough time is given for any remaining major errors to be caught. > The CR period will be extended if implementations are slow to appear. > > 3. Text, which can be in a separate document, exists that explains the > security considerations for this specification. This may be done in a generic > manner as they are most likely applicable to various APIs. The working group > will decide whether the text is of sufficient quality. > > An update to this draft will point to the test suite. > ]] > > As such, the comment period for this Call for Consensus is extended to July > 13. > > As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged and > silence will be assumed to be assent. > > -Art Barstow > > On 6/15/10 1:03 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: >> This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of >> XMLHttpRequest: >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/ >> >> The comment period for the 19 November 2009 LCWD of XHR [LC] ended 16 >> December 2009 and the disposition of comments for this LCWD is: >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest/disposition-of-comments-3 >> >> During this CfC review period, Anne and Thomas agreed to work on the >> Security Considerations issue and others are welcome to contribute. >> >> A test suite has not been agreed by the Working Group, and will not be >> required for the CR to be published. However, agreeing on a test suite >> will be part of the work we will do before this spec can move further >> than CR. >> >> The Editor's Draft does not yet include CR exit criteria. I would expect >> the criteria to be similar to our previous CRs i.e. require a thorough >> test suite and at least two implementations that pass all tests. (We can >> discuss the criteria separately.) >> >> This CfC satisfies: a) the group's requirement to "record the group's >> decision to request advancement" to CR; and b) "General Requirements for >> Advancement on the Recommendation Track" as defined in the Process Document: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs >> >> As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged >> and silence will be assumed to be assent. The deadline for comments is >> June 30. >> >> -Art Barstow >> >> [LC] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-XMLHttpRequest-20091119/ >> >> >> >
