Below, Marcos proposed a change request to the Widget Interface spec and
this is a Call for Consensus to accept this proposal and to update the
spec accordingly.
Marcos asserted in followups to his proposal that this change would not
affect any implementations nor applications. As such, the
to
this e-mail (off-list responses are fine too).
-Art Barstow
[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage
On 11/21/11 2:14 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote:
The idea is not to remove APIs.
We have several client-side storage facilities
Hi IanF, All,
Following up on Quota API vis-à-visCharterChanges wiki [1] ...
Does the group want to add Quota API to the group's charter? If yes,
where is a draft/strawman proposal?
-AB
[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/CharterChanges
On 11/8/11 12:37 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote
/CharterChanges
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/10/31-webapps-minutes.html#item13
On 11/8/11 12:37 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
During the October 31 meeting, we discussed [1] various additions,
changes and deletions for WebApps' current charter [2]. To consolidate
the various proposals, I created
CR was
published.)
-AB
On 11/8/11 12:37 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
During the October 31 meeting, we discussed [1] various additions,
changes and deletions for WebApps' current charter [2]. To consolidate
the various proposals, I created the following doc:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps
On 11/21/11 12:08 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi,
As part of LC, I've received quite a bit of offline feedback that because of
some issue in Webkit, it's difficult for implementers to reuse the WebStorage
interface in a widget context: the problem is that Widget's use of Web storage
[[ removed the chairs list since I think this is now mostly a WebApps
thing ... ]]
I haven't seen any objections to dropping XHR1 and voices of support to
redirect the XMLHttpRequest2 shortname to XMLHttpRequest.
I think it would be helpful to some readers if the new XHR spec (i.e.
the spec
On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote:
The idea is not to remove APIs.
We have several client-side storage facilities that cover different
but overlapping
usecases. Can we step back and look at what we have and come up,
perhaps, with a
smaller set of facilities and better
The comment period for the October 25 LCWD of Web Storage [LC] ended
November 15. No bugs were submitted since the LC was published. Two
comments were submitted and they are tracked in:
[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011
I propose: a) the comments in [1]
/webapps/wiki/Database
[CfC]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0998.html
On 11/14/11 5:44 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Hi Ashok,
I agree with Tab's comments and wanted to mention some of the related
history ...
The relationships between WebApps' various database
Hi Ashok,
I agree with Tab's comments and wanted to mention some of the related
history ...
The relationships between WebApps' various database related specs has
been discussed before and [DB-wiki] was created to help clarify the
relationships. The good news is there are now 2 specs rather
On 11/11/11 7:53 PM, ext Adrian Bateman wrote:
On Friday, November 04, 2011 4:59 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
One of the topics discussed this week was to designate a Test Spec
Editor(s) for each of our specs.
We're supportive of this idea.
(BTW, the title of Test Spec Editor is a bit
Arthur Barstow wrote:
During the October 31 meeting [1], there was agreement to publish a
Candidate Recommendation of the WebSockets API and this is a Call for
Consensus to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/
The remaining open editorial bug [13700] will be fixed before
publication.
I
On 11/11/11 12:41 PM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:37:55 -0800, Arthur Barstow
art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
During the October 31 meeting, we discussed [1] various additions,
changes and deletions for WebApps' current charter [2]. To
consolidate the various proposals, I
I'd like to get Web Workers moving on the REC track but it currently is
blocked by two open bugs:
* 14086 When performing AJAX type queries ...
What, if anything, should we do with this bug?
Given it is marked as an enhancement, does anyone consider this
mandatory to address before
I'd like to get Web Messaging moving on the REC track but it currently
is blocked by one open bug:
* 13686 - Remove the special case from onmessage (to call start())
There has been considerable debate (e.g. re-opened six times) but some
of the later comments kinda' indicate there may be some
On 11/10/11 4:36 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
Hi,
On Nov 9, 2011, at 00:25 , James Hawkins wrote:
Under 'Additions Agreed':
* Web Intents - this will be a joint deliverable with DAPI WG
Pedantically, not politically: My recollection is that the agreement was only
to add Web Intents to the
On 11/2/11 5:09 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
The DRAFT minutes from the November 1 f2f meeting are in the following
document and copied below:
The original email did not include the resource:
http://www.w3.org/2011/11/01-webapps-minutes.html
Applications Working Group Issue Tracker
wrote:
ACTION-628: Talk to Doug about the traversal from Element Traversal to DOM4
(Web Applications Working Group)
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/628
On: Arthur Barstow
Due: 2011-11-07
If you do not want to be notified on new action items
Original Message
Subject:RfC: LCWD of Web Storage ; deadline November 15
Resent-Date:Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:04:52 +
Resent-From:public-webapps@w3.org
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 07:04:19 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: public-webapps
Below is a followup on the short discussion we had on October 31 re the
HTML Editing APIs ...
On 11/1/11 10:05 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
The DRAFT minutes from the October 31 f2f meeting are in the following
document and copied below:
http://www.w3.org/2011/10/31-webapps-minutes.html
During the October 31 meeting, we discussed [1] various additions,
changes and deletions for WebApps' current charter [2]. To consolidate
the various proposals, I created the following doc:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/CharterChanges
My expectation is that Doug will this information
I propose using the mail list and then after we get consensus, the wiki
is updated accordingly.
On 11/8/11 1:04 PM, ext James Hawkins wrote:
To clarify, should we comment on this thread or in the wiki?
Thanks,
James
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
On 11/8/11 8:50 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote:
On Nov 7, 2011, at 20:52 , Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
One theme that was easy to observe at the conference was the pondering
around who those mysterious consumers of what we do are, how to reach
them, and how to reason about them. I heard people speak of
On 11/3/11 5:16 PM, ext Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 11/3/11 8:28 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:07:20 -0700, Julian Reschke
julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
Reminder: this was a past-LC change. I think I'm not asking too much
when I'm asking for a precise explanation of what
Hi All,
One of the topics discussed this week was to designate a Test Spec
Editor(s) for each of our specs.
One reason to identify Test Spec Editors is to acknowledge that some
Spec Editors don't have the cycles to lead their spec's testing effort
and another is to try to prevent the
During the October 31 meeting [1], there was agreement to publish a
Candidate Recommendation of the WebSockets API and this is a Call for
Consensus to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/
The remaining open editorial bug [13700] will be fixed before publication.
I propose the CR exit
On 11/2/11 6:41 PM, ext Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
You can see the minutes here: http://www.w3.org/2011/11/02-webapps-minutes.html
Thanks Dimitri.
First of all, thank you all for coming and participating.
That goes for me and Chaals too re Monday and Tuesday!
It was exhausting, and we just
The Draft agenda for the November 1 f2f meeting was updated yesterday
and will like get some tweaks at the beginning of the meeting (starts @
09:00):
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2011#Agenda_Tuesday.2C_November_1
-AB
Hi Bryan - please work with Chaals to schedule some time for this topic.
Currently, the schedule is full but it may be possible to shorten the
time allocated for a specific topic or to add it at the end of the day
i.e. 17:00:
On October 25 a LCWD of Web Storage was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-webstorage-20111025/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by November 15.
On October 27, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch Events
version 1 spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20111027/
That WG explicitly asked the WebApps WG for comments.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Web Events
Events as a CR
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:11:52 +
From: ext Jacob Rossi jacob.ro...@microsoft.com
To: Arthur Barstow (art.bars...@nokia.com)
art.bars...@nokia.com, Charles McCathieNevile (cha...@opera.com)
cha...@opera.com
CC: Doug Schepers (schep...@w3.org) schep...@w3.org,
www
Hi Alex - as I mentioned in [1], until the objections to the publication
of a D3E CR are resolved I propose this RfR be postponed.
-Regards, Art Barstow
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2011OctDec/0116.html
On 10/14/11 1:49 PM, ext Alex Kuang wrote:
We have submitted 21 test
Original Message
Subject: Mobile Web Applications Interoperability Event, 6-7 December
2011, Sophia-Antipolis, France
Resent-Date:Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:45:25 +
Resent-From:public-test-in...@w3.org
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:44:54 +0200
From: ext Francois Daoust
On 10/18/11 1:14 PM, ext Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
As co-director of the IETF Applications Area, I will be attending TPAC
this year. If there is interest, I would be happy to provide a brief
(15-minute) report to the WebApps WG about work on the WebSocket
protocol at the IETF and coordination
:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/TPAC2011#Potential_Topics
If you have any suggestions, please add them to the wiki or send them to
this list.
On 9/12/11 4:56 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
As indicated a few months ago [1], WebApps will have a f2f meeting
during the October 31 - November 4
Original Message
Subject:RfC: LCWD of Web Socket API; comment deadline October 21
Resent-Date:Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:29:15 +
Resent-From:public-webapps@w3.org
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:28:29 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: public
as a CR
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 03:11:52 +
From: ext Jacob Rossi jacob.ro...@microsoft.com
To: Arthur Barstow (art.bars...@nokia.com) art.bars...@nokia.com,
Charles McCathieNevile (cha...@opera.com) cha...@opera.com
CC: Doug Schepers (schep...@w3.org) schep...@w3.org, www-...@w3.org
www-...@w3
This is a Call for Consensus to publish a new Working Draft of the
Indexed Database API spec (last published 19-Apr-2011):
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
Agreement to the proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new WD;
and b) does not necessarily indicate
Although the bug list for Web Storage is back to zero, rev 1.182 [1]
which replaces the initXXXEvent method with a constructor (ala DOM4)
requires a new LC. As such, this a Call for Consensus to publish a new
LCWD of this spec:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/
The Process Document states
On 9/27/11 3:56 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
On September 27 a Last Call Working Draft of Web IDL was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-WebIDL-20110927/
The deadline for comments is October 18 and all comments should be
sent to:
public-script-co...@w3.org
The comment tracking doc
On 10/11/11 4:08 PM, ext Travis Leithead wrote:
Is there a comment tracking doc for this LC (e.g., lc2)?
I don't see one in CVS. (I think Cameron returns soon though.)
This is a Call for Consensus to publish a WD of the File API spec (last
published 26-Oct-2010):
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/
Positive response to this CfC is preferred and encouraged and silence
will be considered as agreement with the proposal. The deadline for
comments is
[ Sorry for the cross posting ... ]
If you are looking for a conference focused on using Web APIs and HTML5
e.g. to develop Web apps, design Web apps, etc., check out this November
15-16 W3Conf conference in Redmond WA US:
[[
http://w3conf.org/
= 2011: HTML5 and the Open Web Platform
W3C,
AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
In [1], Julian asks about Web Socket API rev 1.247 [2], the change
that adds the Parsing WebSocket URLs section (CVS comment Revert the
part of r5409 that removed the URL parsing algorithms, since it's no
longer defined in the protocol spec. (whatwg r6632)).
Would
This is a Call for Consensus to publish a WD of Server-Sent Events (last
published 10-Mar-2011):
http://dev.w3.org/html5/eventsource/
Positive response to this CfC is preferred and encouraged and silence
will be considered as agreement with the proposal. The deadline for
comments is
[ + DAPI Chairs and Team Contact ]
Hi Ian, All - for now, I think it is OK to use public-webapps for
*technical* discussions regarding James' proposal.
Let's plan to continue the charter-related part of this discussion
during WebApp's TPAC meeting. I added it to the Monday October 31
On 10/5/11 3:15 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2011-09-29 18:28, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On September 29, aLCWD of Web Sockets API was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-websockets-20110929/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by October 21.
I just noted
elaborate on this change?
-AB
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0125.html
[2]
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/html5/websockets/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.246;r2=1.247;f=h
On 10/5/11 3:15 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2011-09-29 18:28, Arthur Barstow wrote:
On September 29
On 10/6/11 9:11 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
On 9/30/11 3:40 PM, ext Ms2ger wrote:
On 09/29/2011 04:32 PM, Doug Schepers wrote:
Hi, Adam-
I'm glad to see some progress on a replacement for Mutation Events.
Would you be interested in being the editor for this spec? It's already
in our
[ + WebAppSec WG ]
I included the WebAppSec WG since CORS is now a joint deliverable of
WebApps and WebAppSec. (CORS is generically named Secure Cross-Domain
Resource Sharing in their charter [1].)
If we are going to have a joint meeting, I have a strong preference for
October 31. WebApps
On 10/6/11 12:16 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Monday, October 3, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
(generally speaking...)
Seems there is a lot of confusion about how to do this properly (and I'm seeing
that this is going to now be an issue amongst a number of groups, including
On 9/13/11 1:32 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
On September 13, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch
Events version 1 spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/
That WG explicitly asked the WebApps WG for comments.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide
The deadline for Position Papers is now October 12.
On 9/9/11 5:09 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Speaking of application caches and widgets, below is an announcement
about a Future of Offline Web Applications workshop on Saturday
November 5 in Redwood City CA US:
http://www.w3.org/2011/web
On September 29, aLCWD of Web Sockets API was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-websockets-20110929/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by October 21.
/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.181;r2=1.182;f=h
On 9/6/11 10:19 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
A new LCWD of Web Storage was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-webstorage-20110901/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by September 27.
27
Resent-Date:Tue, 6 Sep 2011 14:21:11 +
Resent-From:public-webapps@w3.org
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:20:49 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: public-webapps public-webapps@w3.org
A new LCWD of Web Workers was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD
On September 27 a Last Call Working Draft of Web IDL was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-WebIDL-20110927/
The deadline for comments is October 18 and all comments should be sent to:
public-script-co...@w3.org
The comment tracking doc for the previous LC is:
Below is Call for Implementation for the Progress Events spec.
Anne, Ms2ger, what is the status of the Progress Events test suite (e.g.
% complete)?
http://w3c-test.org/webapps/ProgressEvents/tests/
Original Message
Subject: Progress Events is a W3C Candidate
The upcoming TPAC meeting (Oct 31 - Nov 01) provides an opportunity for
joint WG meetings and lots of informal sharing. As such, some groups
make spec publications right before TPAC.
Note there is a 2-week publication blackout period around the TPAC week
and Oct 24 is the last day to request
Hi Vincent, All - given there were no negative comments regarding
Vincent's proposal, Doug and I will work toward updating WebEvents'
charter to add the Mouse Lock API.
Additionally, as indicated in [1], we will also work toward adding the
Gamepad API [2] (formerly know as the Joystick API)
Hi Aryeh, All - Aryeh's response below clarifies my last question about
the relationship between the HTML Editing APIs CG and WebApps.
I think the main points are:
* The members of the HTML Editing APIs CG do not think the HTML Editing
APIs spec is ready for Recommendation track (and I don't
On 9/19/11 1:56 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Arthur Barstowart.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
Since you are the Chair of the HTML Editing APIs CG [CG], would you please
explain what you see as the relationship between the CG and WebApps
vis-à-vis the Editing spec? In
Thanks for your clarifications Aryeh. One follow-up below re
contributions to the Editing spec ...
On 9/22/11 12:43 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Arthur Barstowart.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
It seems to me, that by virtue of using public-webapps, it does give
:07 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
As an update on this RfC, note that ATM, 13777 is the only
non-editorial bug that remains open:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13777
I would appreciate it, if people would please provide input on this bug.
-AB
On 9/9/11 6:05 PM, ext Brian Raymor
Storage; deadline September 27
Resent-Date:Tue, 6 Sep 2011 14:19:41 +
Resent-From:public-webapps@w3.org
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:19:03 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: public-webapps public-webapps@w3.org
A new LCWD of Web Storage was published:
http
Workers; deadline September 27
Resent-Date:Tue, 6 Sep 2011 14:21:11 +
Resent-From:public-webapps@w3.org
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:20:49 -0400
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: public-webapps public-webapps@w3.org
A new LCWD of Web Workers was published:
http
Hi Marcos,
On 9/16/11 10:14 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Friday, 16 September 2011 at 20:04, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Marcos, All,
To clearly state that WebApps' work on the Widget Requirements and
Widget Landscape documents has ended, I propose they be published as
Working Group Notes
Aryeh - coming back to your question below ...
Since you are the Chair of the HTML Editing APIs CG [CG], would you
please explain what you see as the relationship between the CG and
WebApps vis-à-vis the Editing spec? In particular, what role(s) do the
CG and WG have?
For example [1]
On 9/19/11 10:54 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
FYI, there is some precedence for publishing Requirements docs as
Recommendations (e.g. OWL UCs and Reqs) . If we want to go that route,
it would presumably mean publishing a LC
[ + public-webapps ]
Original Message
Subject: [widgets] Status of Packing, DigSig and view-modes Proposed
Recommendations
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:58:24 -0400
From: Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: Marcos Caceres marcoscace...@gmail.com, Doug Schepers
schep
Marcos, All,
To clearly state that WebApps' work on the Widget Requirements and
Widget Landscape documents has ended, I propose they be published as
Working Group Notes:
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-land/
http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/
If anyone has any comments or objections to
Hi All,
This thread has taken a few twists and turns and is now relatively far
from Aryeh's original question of Does anyone object to public-webapps
being used to discuss the HTML Editing spec?. I will start a separate
RfC or CfC on that specific question.
In the meantime, if you want to
DOM4 was published in /TR/ today
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-dom-20110915/.
Please use www-...@w3.org for all DOM4 discussions.
Hi All,
As Scott knows, and as suggested by some responses to this thread, the
members of the Web Events WG are interested in adding the Joystick API
to its charter [1]. As such, my expectation is the process to formally
update Web Event's charter to add this API will begin soon.
-Art
Hixie, Brian, Jonas, All,
Since Brian sent the original e-mail [1], there has been some Bugzilla
activity and there are now 5 open bugs for Web Sockets. It appears to me
(and please correct me if I'm wrong) the .binaryType issue Jonas
raised on the list [2] will not result in any spec
Since some related functionality was included (at one point) in the
HTML5 spec, it seems like we should ask the HTML WG for feedback on
Aryeh's email.
Aryeh told me there are some related bugs:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13423
On September 13, the Web Events WG published a LCWD of the Touch Events
version 1 spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-Touch-Events-20110913/
That WG explicitly asked the WebApps WG for comments.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Web Events WG.
On 9/9/11 6:27 AM, ext Olli Pettay wrote:
On 09/07/2011 05:09 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Arthur
Barstowart.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
Some members of the group consider the D3E spec as the highest
priority of
our DOM-related specs and they have put considerable
Hi All - based on the changes made to address the comments received [1]
for Web IDL LC #1, Cameron recommends WebApps publish LC#2 and this is a
Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to record the group's
Speaking of application caches and widgets, below is an announcement
about a Future of Offline Web Applications workshop on Saturday
November 5 in Redwood City CA US:
http://www.w3.org/2011/web-apps-ws/
Position Papers are due September 30.
Original Message
Subject: Join
Speaking of application caches and widgets, below is an announcement
about a Future of Offline Web Applications workshop on Saturday
November 5 in Redwood City CA US:
http://www.w3.org/2011/web-apps-ws/
Position Papers are due September 30.
Original Message
Subject: Join
:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:12:45 +0200, Arthur Barstow
art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
The CfC to publish a new WD of DOM Core was blocked by this RfC. I
will proceed with a request to publish a new WD of DOM Core in TR/.
The name DOM Core will be used for the upcoming WD. If anyone wants
to propose
On 9/4/11 9:38 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:12:45 +0200, Arthur Barstow
art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
Re the scope of DOM Core, I agree the spec lacks clear text regarding
its scope. Inputs for scope, as well as the spec's requirements,
should be submitted to the list
On 9/5/11 3:34 PM, ext Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
We should make these kinds of
decisions *solely* on technical grounds.
Well surely making decisions on technical grounds is important. However,
it seems a bit simplistic to consider it the only factor. (I seem to
recall some previous decisions
A new LCWD of Web Storage was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-webstorage-20110901/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by September 27.
A new LCWD of Web Workers was published:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-workers-20110901/
Please send all comments to public-webapps@w3.org by September 27.
All - we had a brief chat about this request in IRC [1].
Marcos wants to publish a new WD (last publication was a LCWD) and the
tentative publication date for that WD is Sept 13.
After there is working code for this spec, Marcos will resume/restart
the scheme registration discussion.
-AB
was blocked by this RfC. I will
proceed with a request to publish a new WD of DOM Core in TR/. The name
DOM Core will be used for the upcoming WD. If anyone wants to propose a
name change, please start a *new* thread.
-Regards, ArtB
On 8/11/11 6:28 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
[ Topic changed
The August 9 Progress Events Last Call comment period ended with 1
comment and that comment appears to have been adequately addressed [1].
As such, Anne proposes the spec be published as a Candidate
Recommendation and this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so:
Cyril - unless we hear otherwise from you, we will assume you are
satisfied with the way your comments have been addressed:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/progress/
Anne - assuming Cyril is agreeable with the way his comments were
addressed, please update the ED to reflect a CR publication
Individuals are encouraged to provide individual feedback directly to
the Web Performance WG.
If anyone in WebApps WG wants to propose an official WG response, please
do so ASAP, in reply to this email so the WebApps WG can discuss it.
On 9/1/11 3:54 PM, ext Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:
This
On 8/13/11 6:19 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:02:56 +0200, Doug Schepers schep...@w3.org
wrote:
After discussion with PLH and Ian Jacobs, and I don't think it's
necessary for us to go through the additional overhead of rescinding
the DOM 2 View specification.
In [1], Anne proposed some text be added to the top of the DOM 2 View
REC [2] to signal the 'document' and 'defaultView' attributes are now
defined in HTML5 and this Recommendation is now effectively obsolete. We
discussed some updates to the proposed text in IRC [3] and we now
propose the
Given no objections to this CfC and no subsequent bug activity, I will
work towards a LC publication on September 1 with a 3-week review period.
On 8/10/11 7:33 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Given Hixie's recent set of bug fixes, the Web Storage spec now has
zero bugs. As such, it appears
the LC publication.
On 8/10/11 7:35 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Given Hixie's recent set of bug fixes, the Web Workers spec now has
zero bugs. As such, it appears this spec is ready to proceed on the
Recommendation track and this is a Call for Consensus to publish a new
LCWD of this spec using
=---
On 8/10/11 10:24 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Given Hixie's recent set of bug fixes, the Server-sent Events spec now
has zero bugs. As such, it appears this spec is ready to proceed on
the Recommendation track and this is a Call for Consensus to publish a
new LCWD of this spec using the following
On 8/9/11 1:34 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
On August 9, WebApps published LCWD #2 of the Progress Events spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-progress-events-20110809/
The comment deadline is September 1. Please send all comments to:
public-webapps@w3.org
-AB
it
should be addressed before the LC is published.
-Art Barstow
On 8/25/11 2:31 PM, ext Brian Raymor wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
wrote:
Hi All,
Bugzilla now reports only 2 bugs for the Web Socket API [WSAPI] and I
would characterize them both
801 - 900 of 1565 matches
Mail list logo
