I object to making such a change.
On 11/16/2012 02:32 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
Before going to CR, I believe the [HTML] entry in the references section
needs to be changed to reference an appropriate W3C specification. A
present, it reference a non-W3C document.
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.bars...@nokia.com>wrote:
On 11/15/12 5:31 PM, ext Hill, Brad wrote:
I have placed a draft for review at:
http://www.w3.org/2011/**webappsec/cors-draft/<http://www.w3.org/2011/webappsec/cors-draft/>
And this is a Call for Consensus among the WebAppSec and WebApps WGs to
take this particular text (with necessary additions to the Status of this
Document section if approved) forward to Candidate Recommendation.
I support this CfC although I am wondering about the CR exit criteria.
Do you expect to re-use the CSP1.0 criteria:
[[
The entrance criteria for this document to enter the Proposed
Recommendation stage is to have a minimum of two independent and
interoperable user agents that implementation all the features of this
specification, which will be determined by passing the user agent tests
defined in the test suite developed by the Working Group.
]]
My preference is what WebApps has used in other CRs because I think it is
clearer that a single implementation is not required to pass every test but
that at least two implementations must pass every test. F.ex.:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-**websockets-20120920/#crec<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-websockets-20120920/#crec>
-Thanks, AB
