This seems to be a more specific instance of WoT. As such, the goals
are much clearer here. While some of the concerns with the WoT
charter apply (security in particular!), here are a few additional
observations:
Exposing the level of information that they claim to want to expose
needs more
A W3C Proposed Recommendation is available for the membership of W3C
(including Mozilla) to vote on, before it proceeds to the final
stage of being a W3C Recomendation:
Media Source Extensions (MSE)
W3C TR draft: https://www.w3.org/TR/media-source/
W3C Editor's draft:
The W3C is proposing a new charter for:
Automotive Working Group
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Oct/0003.html
https://www.w3.org/2014/automotive/charter-2016.html
Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through
Monday, November 7. However, I
The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
Audio Working Group
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Oct/.html
https://www.w3.org/2011/audio/charter/audio-2016.html
Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through
Monday, October 31. However, I
The W3C is proposing a revised charter for:
Second Screen Working Group
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-new-work/2016Sep/0011.html
https://www.w3.org/2014/secondscreen/charter-2016.html
Mozilla has the opportunity to send comments or objections through
next Tuesday, October 25.
The comments I submitted on the WoT charter are archived at:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2016Oct/0004.html
-David
On Friday 2016-10-14 15:03 +0100, Benjamin Francis wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> We collected some feedback in a document
>
The comments submitted on HTML 5.1 are archived at:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2016Oct/0003.html
-David
On Thursday 2016-10-13 17:35 -0700, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> For the record, I have reviewed the HTML5.1 changes:
>
>
Resurrecting this old thread to let you all know that this autolanded last
night, and (if all goes well) should merge to mozilla-central soon. Thanks
to MattN for the reviews!
Dirty details are in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1296638
On 20 August 2016 at 06:10, Gijs Kruitbosch
Thanks for taking the time to provide thorough feedback.
3) For Windows Vista, I don't see where the fire is. I realize that it has
> a vastly smaller user base, but it is close to Window 7 code base and API
> wise.
I'm sure the engineering team can probably provide a more detailed response
on
9 matches
Mail list logo