Re: Staying on Topic [Was: Re: WebPortable/PlatformProprietary - An Established Concept]

On 2/19/15 9:57 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote: Where are you supposed to propose new APIs? Can such proposal be made by non-W3C members? This was a proposal for using Chrome Native Messaging as the foundation for a new standard. Perhaps you should pursue the Community Group process

Staying on Topic [Was: Re: WebPortable/PlatformProprietary - An Established Concept]

On 2/19/15 9:35 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote: Hi Anders, In the spirit of restricting postings on this list to the group's chartered scope ... I don't see a clear and direct connection between your posting [1] and WebApps' chartered scope [2]. If I missed such a connection, please focus your r

Re: Web Components F2F in April 2015

[ - the easily recognizable p-webapps subscribers ] On 2/18/15 12:50 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: Following Art's suggestion [1], I propose a Web Components-specific F2F with with the primary goal of reaching consensus on the Shadow DOM contentious bits [2]. When: Friday, April 24, 2015 Where:

RfC: Manifest for web application; review deadline March 5

[ Bcc: public-webappsec, www-style, public-privacy, public-sysapps, public-digipub-ig, public-pfwg, public-web-mobile, www-international, chairs^1, public-review-announce; Reply-to: public-webapps ] This is a Request for Comments (RfC) for WebApp's "Manifest for web application" specification:

IETF seeking feedback on proposed "Token Binding" Working Group

[ public-webapps should have been included but was not ] Forwarded Message Subject:IETF seeking feedback on proposed "Token Binding" Working Group Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 07:00:35 -0500 From: Arthur Barstow Reply-To: unbeara...@ietf.org CC: Steph

Standards wonks and developers working together [Was: Re: do not deprecate synchronous XMLHttpRequest]

On 2/10/15 3:51 PM, Marc Fawzi wrote: I wish there was an app like Hacker News where browser vendors via W3C, TAG, webapps etc engage users and developers in discussions and use up/down votes to tell what matters most to users and developers. I like this idea. I think this is one of the reason

Staying on topic [Was: Re: do not deprecate synchronous XMLHttpRequest]

On 2/10/15 3:43 PM, Michaela Merz wrote: The web-developers are the people who have to use the available browser technologies to provide what users want. And often we can't oblige because - well, browsers don't implement it for whatever reason. Michaela - this list is for technical discussions

Violation of mail list policy [Was: Fwd: Re: do not deprecate synchronous XMLHttpRequest]

Michaela, Some of the language you used in [1] is offensive. Per the group's mail list etiquette policy ([2]), please do not use such language on WebApps' mail lists. -Regards, AB [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2015JanMar/0538.html [2] https://www.w3.org/2008/webapp

Mail list Etiquette [Was: Re: Shadow tree style isolation primitive]

[ Apologies for cross-posting ] On 2/4/15 6:56 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote: That sounds rather demeaning and insulting [1]. public-webapps, or a mailing list of any W3C working group, isn't an appropriate forum to rant. Given this thread resulted in some "heated" replies, I'd like to remind everyo

Re: Are web components *seriously* not namespaced?

On 2/4/15 4:41 PM, Dimitri Glazkov wrote The proposed solution is using registries: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24578 Thanks Dimitri. Glen - FYI, I added a link to the thread you started to the above bug (and embellished the bug's title a bit to reflect this thread). The

PSA: publishing new WD of Service Workers on February 5

The Service Workers editors - which now includes Jake Archibald (thanks Jake!) - would like to publish a new WD of Service Workers and the proposed publication date is February 5: If anyone has an

Toward more productive f2f meetings [Was:Re: Feedback needed for April 2015 face-to-face location by *January 27, 2015*]

On 1/20/15 5:38 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: We are fortunate enough to have two proposed locations for the HTML and Web Applications face-to-face meeting in the week of April 13-17, 2015. Your feedback will help us picking the location. 1. Redmond, WA, USA (Hosted by Microsoft): 2. Zaragoza,

Re: [IndexedDB] link to Editor's draft is a 404

On 2/2/15 7:14 AM, Tobie Langel wrote: Hi, Heads-up that the link to the Editor's Draft of the IndexedDB spec is now a 404. Thanks for reporting this Tobie. I've asked Joshua and Mike Smith to address this problem. Not sure whether that is on purpose or an accident. This is a side effec

CfC: publish Wide Review Draft of Manifest for web application; deadline Feb 5

Marcos is working toward a Candidate Recommendation of "Manifest for web application" and before that step, we need to publish a Working Draft for "Wide Review" [WR] (a WR Draft is equivalent to a "Last Call" draft as defined in the consortium's 2005 Process). As such, this is a Call for Consen

[admin] Important: Feedback needed for April 2015 face-to-face location by *January 27, 2015*

All Editors and Active contributors - I would greatly appreciate it if you would please reply to this poll. If you do not intend to attend the meeting `live` regardless of its location, please reply with "No" to both locations and state in the comments something like "will not attend".

FYI: Change in my affiliation

[ Bcc public-pointer-events ] FYI, as of January 20, I am no longer an employee (or affiliated with) Nokia. I have been re-appointed as a co-Chair of WebApps (and Chair of Pointer Events WG) under an Invited Expert status. I will continue to chair as a "volunteer" as I seek a new employer to

Re: API common subset

On 1/23/15 5:11 AM, Kan-Ru Chen (陳侃如) wrote: Hi all, I intend to implement the element in gecko and as part of my research I put up a wiki page that summarize the browser-api or API that has been implemented by vendors here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/WebAPI/BrowserAPI/Common_Subset I wond

RfC: Manifest for web application

[ Bcc public-review-announce ] Marcos considers the Manifest for web application `feature complete` so this is a Request for Comments using the following ED as the basis: If you have any comments, please send them to public-webapps @ w3.org or file an issue

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Packaging on the Web; deadline November 3

On 10/27/14 12:34 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Jeni and the TAG would like to publish - on behalf of both the TAG and WebApps - a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of the "Packaging on the Web" specification and this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so using the following ED as

Re: [Selection] Should selection.getRangeAt return a clone or a reference?

On 1/13/15 6:54 AM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: 13.01.2015, 05:31, "Boris Zbarsky" : On 1/12/15 1:56 PM, Olivier Forget wrote: Unfortunately multiple range selections are not a "nice to have". All "real" editors (MS Word, Google Docs, etc..) support selecting multiple ranges Precisely.

PSA: Indexed Database API is a W3C Recommendation

Congratulations All! This was a job very well done. On 1/8/15 2:37 PM, Coralie Mercier wrote: It is my pleasure to announce that Indexed Database API is published as a W3C Recommendation http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-IndexedDB-20150108/ This specification defines an API for a database of record

FYI: Deep linking

FYI. If anyone thinks WebApps should be involved in this area, please speak (f.ex. what is the connection, what role would WebApps have, etc.). -Thanks, ArtB Forwarded Message Subject:Deep linking Resent-Date:Tue, 06 Jan 2015 10:45:04 + Resent-From:public

Re: DOM L3 Events Input Events Work to the Editing Task Force

On 12/15/14 7:00 PM, Ben Peters wrote: On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Gary Kacmarcik (Кошмарчик) wrote: [...] Thus, I wonder if a separate Input Event spec (that both D3E and Editing would refer to) would make more sense. I think so. I have started that spec at http://w3c.github.io/editing

Re: [webmessaging] Need to analyze test failures

until there are two or more passes. -Thanks, AB [All] http://w3c.github.io/test-results/webmessaging/all.html [<2] http://w3c.github.io/test-results/webmessaging/less-than-2.html [CR] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-webmessaging-20120501/ On 11/23/14 6:54 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi Cindy, K

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of Custom Elements on December 16

On 12/10/14 8:10 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Dimitri prepared a new Working Draft of Custom Elements for publication on December 16: <http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/publish/custom/WD-custom-elements-20141218/> FYI, this WD was published today <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-custom

Re: HTML imports in Firefox

On 12/15/14 2:09 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: On 12/15/14, 1:10 PM, Ashley Gullen wrote: Why would modules affect the decision to ship HTML imports? Because the interaction of the various import systems with each other needs to be specified, for one thing. But more to the point, we're not ship

Re: PSA: publishing new WD of Custom Elements on December 16

On 12/15/14 6:00 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote: Hi Art, I don't have any objection to publishing as is. Would like to note that I have pretty much completed the first draft of the custom element semantics stuff now http://stevefaulkner.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/#semantics and have filed a

Re: [editing] Responsive Input Terminology

On 12/12/14 6:25 AM, Tobie Langel wrote: I'd be extremely wary of naming a category of DOM events after a term that has a high buzz factor. Hi Tobie, What is your counter-proposal? -Thanks, AB

PSA: publishing new WD of Custom Elements on December 16

Dimitri prepared a new Working Draft of Custom Elements for publication on December 16: If anyone has any major concerns about this proposal, please speak up. -Thanks, AB

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

On 11/21/14 8:43 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 09:44 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/19/14 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec should stop

[admin] Upcoming TR publishing moratorium

TL;DR: December 18 is the last TR publication date in 2014. Hi Editors, All, The consortium has an end of the year TR publication blackout period from December 19 through January 5. This gives us the following dates to work with: * December 08 - last day to start a CfC to publish a LC * Dece

PSA: publishing new WD of Clipboard API and events on December 9

Hallvord would like to publish a new WD of Clipboard API and events and the plan is to publish that WD on or around December 9. If anyone has any major concerns about this plan, please reply as such right away. -Thanks, AB

Re: [Push-API] Browser Implementation

On 12/5/14 6:19 AM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: Hi, I've been trying to find a browser build that support the Push-API but failed. I was wondering if anyone on this list could point me to a revision/build that I might be able to build and try out. Hi Daniel, FYI, there are related Intent to Imp

[custom-elements] Re: web developer conformance requirements and advice in custom elements spec

On 12/6/14 4:21 AM, Steve Faulkner wrote: Hi all, looking at the custom elements spec http://w3c.github.io/webcomponents/spec/custom/ i realized it includes no defined requirements or advice for web developers on creation of custom elements that are meaningful and expose useful semantics and

Re: PSA: Publishing working draft of URL spec

On 12/3/14 10:42 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: On 12/02/2014 06:54 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: I'm new to being a W3C Editor, but I did manage to find: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules Besides the above, the following which includes links to the various validators:

PSA: public-webapps-github archives WebApps' Github activity

[ Bcc: public-editing-tf ] TL;DR: if you want to receive an e-mail notification for Webapps' spec related activity on Github, subscribe to the new public-webapps-github list [p-w-g]. Thanks to Robin's idea and Yves' perseverance, the new p-w-g list gets an e-mail for all of WebApps' GH activ

[webmessaging] Need to analyze test failures

Hi Cindy, Kris, All, Earlier today I ran the webmessaging tests on Chrome, FF, IE and Opera (12.16) and uploaded the results plus the wptreport files to [test-results]. The good news is that 104/118 tests (~90%) have 2 or more passes, however, there are also 14 tests with less than passes. D

CfC: publish Proposed Recommendation of Server-Sent Events; deadline November 28

The latest interop data Zhiqiang generated for Server-sent Events [All] indicates 102/124 passes and [<2] isolates the 22 failures with less than two implementations including 9 failures which are due to Web IDL implementation bugs (thus, not counting the WebIDL failures the pass rate is 111/12

PSA: Indexed Database API Proposed Recommendation published; (Call for Review deadline Dec 18)

Hi All - a Proposed Recommendation of IDB was published today [PR]. I would appreciate it if Members would please ask their Advisory Committee representative [AC-Dir] to respond to this PR's Call for Review by December 18: I was very impr

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

On 11/19/14 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I consider this CfC (as written) as failed. Travis

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 10:28 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: During WebApps' October 27 meeting, the participants agreed to stop work on the UI Events spec and to publish it as a WG Note (see [Mins]). As such, this is a formal Call for Consensus (CfC) to: a) Stop work on this spec b) Publish a "

PSA: Sam Ruby is co-Editor of URL spec

On 11/18/14 3:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: On 11/18/2014 09:51 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Given URL is a joint deliverable between WebApps and TAG, perhaps it would be helpful if you were a co-Editor. Are you interested in that role? Yes. OK, PubStatus updated accordingly. -Thanks, AB

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 8:39 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: this is a formal Call for Consensus to: a) Stop work on the spec (and remove it as a deliverable if/when WebApps' charter is updated) b) Publish a WG Note of this spec; (see [Draft-Note] for the proposed document) c) "gut" the

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of XHR Level 2; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 11:46 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: this is a Call for Consensus to: a) Publish a gutted WG Note of the spec (see [Draft-Note]) FYI, this WG Note has been published <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-XMLHttpRequest2-20141118/>.

Re: [url] follow-ups from the TPAC F2F Meeting

On 10/29/14 9:54 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: I am willing to help with this effort. Thanks for this information [1] and sorry for the delayed reply. Given URL is a joint deliverable between WebApps and TAG, perhaps it would be helpful if you were a co-Editor. Are you interested in that role? Regard

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/8/14 2:07 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: 08.11.2014, 14:43, "Domenic Denicola" : From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@gmail.com] OK, so I just checked in a patch that sets the Latest Editor's Draft points to Anne's document <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/full

Re: CfC: publish Proposed Recommendation of Indexed Database; deadline November 9

On 11/2/14 2:27 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: During WebApps' October 27 meeting [Mins], the group reviewed the Indexed Database testing data [Data] and agreed the specification should be published as a Proposed Recommendation (see [CR]). As such, this is Call for Consensus to publish a Pro

Re: [eventsource] ACTION-742: Re sse test results, followup on the timeouts with the 2 test facilitators (Web Applications Working Group)

On 11/13/14 4:34 AM, Simon Pieters wrote: On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 10:14:38 +0100, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Zhang, Zhiqiang wrote: We may need to re-evaluate the tests, however, because the latest editor draft has removed this statement in the CR: [[ This constru

PSA: publishing new WD of Service Workers on November 13

Jungkee and Alex created a new Working Draft of Service Workers for publication as a Technical Report on November 13: If anyone has any major concerns this proposal, please speak up as soon as

RfC: WebAppSec's Last Call Working Draft of Mixed Content; deadline December 11

[ Bcc: public-review-announce ] All, This is a Request for Comments for the November 13 Last Call Working Draft of WebAppSec's Mixed Content specification: Please see in particular the spec's "Modifications to WebSockets" section

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 10:36 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by November 14 at the latest. My concern is that we previously agreed that UI Events would be a much more suitable name for the

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of XHR Level 2; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 1:05 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: 07.11.2014, 18:28, "Domenic Denicola" : On Nov 7, 2014, at 17:55, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/default/TR/XHRL2-Note-2014-Nov.html Shoul

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 12:57 PM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: 07.11.2014, 17:53, "fantasai" : On 11/07/2014 09:01 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/7/14 8:48 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: [Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/fullscree

CfC: publish WG Note of XHR Level 2; deadline November 14

During WebApps' XHR discussion on October 27, no one expressed interest to work on XHR L2 [Mins]. The last TR of XHR L2 was published in January 2012 [WD] thus that version should be updated to clarify work has stopped. As such, this is a Call for Consensus to: a) Publish a gutted WG Note of t

CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

During WebApps' October 27 meeting, the participants agreed to stop work on the UI Events spec and to publish it as a WG Note (see [Mins]). As such, this is a formal Call for Consensus (CfC) to: a) Stop work on this spec b) Publish a "gutted" WG Note of the spec; see [Draft-Note] c) Gut the E

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 8:48 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: [Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/fullscreen/raw-file/default/TR.html It would be nice if editor's draft points to https://fullscreen.spec.whatwg.org/ That would be OK with me but as

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 9:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Do you want`Mozilla Foundation` like Tantek? (If not, please let me know what you do want.) I would prefer just Mozilla. It's not a legal matter, after all. Please give me @X and @Y i

Re: CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

On 11/7/14 8:43 AM, cha...@yandex-team.ru wrote: 07.11.2014, 14:41, "Arthur Barstow" : [ Sorry for the cross posting but the Fullscreen spec is a joint a) Stop work on the spec (and remove it as a deliverable if/when WebApps' charter is updated) Yes (and no) For the purposes

CfC: publish a WG Note of Fullscreen; deadline November 14

[ Sorry for the cross posting but the Fullscreen spec is a joint deliverable for WebApps and CSS ] Hi Anne, Tantek, WebApps and CSSWG, During WebApps' October 27 f2f meeting, the attendees had a straw-poll regarding stopping work on the Fullscreen spec (a joint deliverable for these two WGS)

CfC: publish Proposed Recommendation of Indexed Database; deadline November 9

track/actions/739 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2014-11-03 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/users/7672#settings

[minutes] 2014-Oct-28 f2f meeting in Santa Clara, CA

The minutes from the October 27 f2f meeting are at the following and copied below: If anyone wants any major corrections, please speak up. Thanks to all the Scribes: Josh, Chaals, Travis and anyone else that helped. -Thanks, AB W3C

[eventsource] ACTION-742: Re sse test results, followup on the timeouts with the 2 test facilitators (Web Applications Working Group)

art.bars...@gmail.com ACTION-742: Re sse test results, followup on the timeouts with the 2 test facilitators (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/742 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2014-11-03 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this gro

[ime-api] Call for Test Facilitator

ssue a call for test facilitator for ime spec (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/740 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2014-11-03 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps

Re: WebApps-ACTION-734: Start cfc to publish ui events as a "gutted" wg note

On 10/27/14 12:06 PM, Travis Leithead wrote: We should have a plan for the bugzilla component (there are some good "future" bugs logged there). Would the bugzilla component stay open? I recommend it be marked "Historical" and closed to new bugs (like we have done for other specs we have stopp

[minutes] 2014-Oct-27 f2f meeting in Santa Clara, CA

f needed fix [on Travis Leithead - due 2014-11-03]. MikeSmith: surprisingly well ArtB:is Alex still available to work as a test facilitator Travis:I don't believe he is, we should find a new facilitator MikeSmith: but I'm just listening in the background while doing other stuff

CfC: publish FPWD of Packaging on the Web; deadline November 3

Jeni and the TAG would like to publish - on behalf of both the TAG and WebApps - a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of the "Packaging on the Web" specification and this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so using the following ED as the basis:

Re: Push API and Service Workers

On 10/24/14 11:36 AM, Shijun Sun wrote: On October 24, 2014 4:30 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 10/22/14 1:21 AM, Shijun Sun wrote: I think we can take a half hour timeslot to discuss the E2E flow for the RTC scenarios using push messages. The goal is to make sure we understand the steps and

Re: [xhr] Questions on the future of the XHR spec, W3C snapshot

[ Apologies for top posting ] I just added a 11:30-12:00 time slot on Monday October 27 for XHR: I believe Jungkee will be at the meeting so, Hallvord and Julian please join via the phone bridge and/or IRC if you ca

Re: Push API and Service Workers

On 10/22/14 1:21 AM, Shijun Sun wrote: On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 2:27 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If we want to take advantage of this opportunity, perhaps you should first flesh out specific issue(s) to discuss, and then try to agree on a time + day slot in advance of the meeting. Thanks

Re: [streams] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/23/14 1:26 PM, Domenic Denicola wrote: From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@gmail.com] I think recent threads about Streams provided some useful information about the status and plans for Streams. I also think it could be useful if some set of you were available to answer questions

Re: [streams-api] Seeking status of the Streams API spec

On 10/22/14 6:27 PM, Paul Cotton wrote: > given the magnitude of the changes in [changeset], a new WD should be published. Can we please wait until after the TPAC week to publish the proposed Streams heartbeat? Given the substantive changes being made here I think it would be best to have a

[fullscreen] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

[streams] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

[quota-api] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: The [Agenda] page for the October 27-28 meeting now includes a list of Potential Topics and other than a one hour block on Monday for the Editing TF plus IndieUI group (to discuss Editing and Selection API specs), currently, all other time slots are

[gamepad] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

[FileAPI] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

[WebComponents] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

[clipboard] Seeking status and plans [Was: [TPAC2014] Creating focused agenda]

On 10/11/14 10:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are an Editor and you did not register for the meeting please note: a) If you can join the meeting via the teleconf bridge, please: 1) add your spec to the Potential Topics list and identify high priority discussion points; 2) plan to dial

Re: Push API and Service Workers

On 10/16/14 5:52 PM, Shijun Sun wrote: On Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:46 AM, Martin Thomson wrote If the push message is being used to deliver a call notification, that sort of delay will definitely be noticed. And I'm assuming that you've tested on a high end Nexus or something like that.

Re: FileSystem API Comments

On 10/21/14 4:36 PM, Ali Alabbas wrote: Hello, I'm with the IE Platform team at Microsoft. We have a few comments on the latest editor's draft of the newly proposed FileSystem API [1]. I believe [1] is Arun's . 1.1 Use cases (3. Audio/Ph

PSA: publish a new WD of Streams API on October 23

The Streams API spec has significant changes since its last TR publication (November 2013). As such, this is an announcement of an intent to publish a new WD on October 23, using the latest ED as the basis: If anyone has any major

Re: [streams-api] Seeking status of the Streams API spec

On 10/14/14 11:06 PM, Takeshi Yoshino wrote: Not to confuse people, too late but I replaced the W3C Streams API spec WD with a pointer to the WHATWG Streams spec and a few sections discussing what we should add to the spec for browser use cases. Takeshi - given the magnitude of the changes in

Re: [xhr] Questions on the future of the XHR spec, W3C snapshot

On 10/19/14 10:02 PM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: Arthur Barstow , 2014-10-19 09:59 -0400: (If someone can show me a PR and/or REC that includes a normative reference to a WHATWG spec, please let me know.) If it's your goal to ensure that we actually do never have a PR or REC with a norm

Re: [xhr] Questions on the future of the XHR spec, W3C snapshot

On 10/17/14 8:19 PM, Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: I'd appreciate if those who consider responding to this thread could be to-the-point and avoid the ideological swordmanship as much as possible. I would appreciate that too (and I will endeavor to moderate replies accordingly.) However, the

Re: test coverage data for XHR spec

On 10/6/14 7:51 AM, Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: To test the outcome, load http://www.w3.org/TR/XMLHttpRequest/ and run this from the browser's dev tools' console: document.body.appendChild(document.createElement('script')).src='http://hallvord.com/temp/xhr/annotate_spec.js' You may have to dis

Re: Push API and Service Workers

On 10/16/14 3:41 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:58 AM, Shijun Sun wrote: Besides, server sent events might be roughly equivalent, but they are horribly kludgy and suffer from robustness issues. You'll have to elaborate on this. Or perhaps file a bug against server-sent

PSA: publish WD of Screen Orientation on Oct 21

Hi All, Mounir would like to publish a new WD of Screen Orientation and the target date for that publication is October 21: If anyone has any major concerns about this plan, please speak up as soon as possible. -Thanks, AB

[TPAC2014] Creating an Issue focused agenda

The [Agenda] page for the October 27-28 meeting now includes a list of Potential Topics and other than a one hour block on Monday for the Editing TF plus IndieUI group (to discuss Editing and Selection API specs), currently, all other time slots are unallocated. I seeded the Potential Topics l

[restyle] Questionnaire wrt Redesign of the W3C Spec Templates

Below is a Questionnaire that is part of a project to redesign W3C spec templates. If you have input, please see below and please send all of your feedback to spec-prod @ w3.org. (I didn't notice a deadline for comments but prior to TPAC would seem reasonable.) Original Message --

Re: ServiceWorkers and Streams discussion at WebApps WG F2F

On 10/7/14 2:57 PM, Paul Cotton wrote: I neither see Alex Russell (ServiceWorkers) nor Domenic Denicola (Streams) registered yet for the WebApps WG F2F meeting in Santa Clara, CA https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2014/registrants Do you believe these two specs will be discussed at the We

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Selection API; deadline Sept 30

On 9/22/14 8:21 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Ryosuke proposes WebApps publish a First Public Working Draft of Selection API and this is a Call for Consensus to do so FYI, this FPWD was published <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-selection-api-20141007/>. Thanks Ryosuke!

Re: PSA: publishing a new WD of Push API on October 7

On 10/2/14 4:32 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Michael and the other Push API Editors intend to publish a new WD of Push API on or about October 7: FYI, a WD was published: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-push-api-20141007/> Thanks Michael!

Fwd: Draft [URL] reference update to informative text

FYI. If you want to comment on Sam's e-mail, please use the channels Sam suggested. Original Message Subject:Draft [URL] reference update to informative text Resent-Date:Tue, 07 Oct 2014 21:07:31 + Resent-From:public-h...@w3.org Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 17:0

[admin] Re: Publication workflow future

[ + public-webapps ] On 8/15/14 5:22 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: Folks, we've been looking at improving our publication workflow and came up with a proposal that is relatively simple and is implementable in a short amount of time. I really hope that folks will love the automatic WD publicati

Re: CfC: publish LCWD of Screen Orientation API; deadline September 18

TR/? -- Mounir On Wed, 1 Oct 2014, at 20:36, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 9/25/14 9:26 AM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, at 21:52, Arthur Barstow wrote: On 9/25/14 6:36 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: It effectively comes down to the fact that the specification describes something, but

[admin] deadlines for publishing specs before TPAC

Because of the upcoming TPAC publication `black out` period, we have two deadlines regarding publishing a spec before TPAC: 1. October 13 is the last day to start a 1-week CfC to publish a LC or CR 2. October 18 is the last day to make a PSA to publish a new WD If you intend to publish a docum

Re: DOM Parsing and Serialization: open WHATWG bugs

On 10/5/14 8:28 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: I just checked in a patch to the ED that adds a Participate block: <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/innerhtml/raw-file/tip/index.html> (If you'd like something else, just let me kno

Re: DOM Parsing and Serialization: open WHATWG bugs

On 10/5/14 3:51 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: Apparently we had two Bugzilla components for this specification. I reassigned all from the WHATWG product to the WebAppsWG product (and we removed the WHATWG component to prevent further confusion): https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?comp

[TPAC2014] Final Reminder: f2f meeting registration deadline is October 8

On 9/10/14 10:17 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: This is a reminder WebApps will meet on Monday and Tuesday (October 27 and 28) during [TPAC2014]. Registration for WebApps' meeting (as well as all other meetings and events that week) is mandatory. <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/

PSA: publishing a new WD of Push API on October 7

Michael and the other Push API Editors intend to publish a new WD of Push API on or about October 7: If anyone has any major concerns about this plan, please reply as such right away. -Thanks, AB

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >