On 9/27/12 8:26 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
This is a Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Pointer Lock using
the following document as the basis for the LC
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerlock/raw-file/tip/index.html.
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to record the group's
decision to request advancement for this LCWD. 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.
]]
The proposed LC review period is 4 weeks.
If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please send them
to public-webapps@w3.org by October 4 at the latest. Positive response
is preferred and encouraged and silence will be considered as
agreement with the proposal.
Hi All - given the discussion in the Is Pointer Lock feature complete
i.e. LC ready? thread (see f.ex. [1] and follow-ons), it appears we
don't yet have consensus the spec is ready for LCWD.
As such, I recommend we work toward consensus on the issues raised in
this thread before proceeding with the LCWD. To help people track the
issues raised, perhaps it would be helpful to create a related bug [2]
(and to add a link to [2] in Status of the Document section).
-AB
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0010.html
[2]
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWGcomponent=Pointer%20Lockresolution=---
