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
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
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)
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
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:
/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 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.
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
[ + 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
[ + 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
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
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,
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.)
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
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
:
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: 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
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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 11/11/11 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
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
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
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
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 11/23/11 1:10 PM, ext Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
Let's iterate and get it to the digestible
point :)
Thanks for the list. Given we consider Web Components already in scope,
I added it to the Additions Agreed section as a reminder it should be an
explicit deliverable [1].
I expect that Web
/gamepad.html
Original Message
Subject:PointerLock and Gamepad APIs
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 00:04:19 -0800
From: ext Darin Fisher da...@google.com
To: public-webeve...@w3.org, Web Applications Working Group WG
public-webapps@w3.org, Arthur Barstow art.bars
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
The Patent Advisory Group for the WARP spec recommended the WG should
continue to work on the spec [1] (Member-only) and there is no need to
modify the CR [2]. Given this recommendation, plus the CR's exit
criteria have been met [3], this is a Call for Consensus to publish a
Proposed
On 11/27/11 10:51 AM, ext John-David Dalton wrote:
I've been half following this thread.
I'm not sure why renaming to XHR is a good idea.
The DOM spec has levels (Level 2, 3) so I don't see the need to consolidate.
I like the distinction and it gives devs some marker to follow for
support in
Although there is an open CfC for some non-substantive changes to the
Widget Interface [1], this is a CfC to publish a new Candidate
Recommendation of this spec, provided there is consensus on [1].
The spec used as the basis of the CR is the latest ED:
Original Message
Subject:New email alias for WebAppSec WG test suite work
Resent-Date:Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:46:50 +
Resent-From:public-webapp...@w3.org
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:46:08 -0700
From: ext Hill, Brad bh...@paypal-inc.com
To:
Anne completed his merge XHR and XHR2 merge and the new History section
includes information about the merge. As such, this is a Call for
Consensus to publish a new WD of XHR using the following ED (not yet
pub ready) as the basis:
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/tip/Overview.html
/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011#LC-2
Thank you.
Noah
On 11/18/2011 10:01 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Noah - the TAG's comment has been added to the comment tracking document
for this LC:
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011#LC-2
If anyone wants to propose
On 11/30/11 8:17 PM, ext Adrian Bateman wrote:
On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 5:43 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Anne completed his merge XHR and XHR2 merge and the new History section
includes information about the merge. As such, this is a Call for
Consensus to publish a new WD of XHR using
On 12/1/11 11:10 AM, ext Kyle Huey wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
mailto:jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
It's possible that someone from this mailing list could contact those
services. It's more likely to happen, though, if you do it yourself.
, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
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
-webapps@w3.org
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 07:29:37 -0500
From: ext Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
To: ext Adrian Bateman adria...@microsoft.com, Anne van Kesteren
ann...@opera.com
CC: public-webapps@ public-webapps public-webapps@w3.org
On 11/30/11 8:17 PM, ext Adrian Bateman wrote
WebApps has been asked to submit comments for the DeviceOrientation
Event LCWD.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Geolocation WG. If you have comments, please send them
to the following list by January 15:
public-geolocat...@w3.org@w3.org
WebApps has been asked to submit comments for the Geolocation API Level
2 LCWD.
Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback
directly to the Geolocation WG. If you have comments, please send them
to the following list by January 15:
public-geolocat...@w3.org@w3.org
On 12/6/11 7:01 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
I'm also concerned at use of the terms limited and very limited to label current implementations as being both
subjective and relativistic - and it implies that attempts to implement have ceased; particularly next to well deployed, Largely
The WebSocket API is now a Candidate Recommendation and as such, a Call
for Implementations was made [CfI]:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-websockets-20111208/
The root of the test suite for this spec follows. Currently, the test
suite consists of submissions from Microsoft and Ms2Ger but
Web Storage is now a Candidate Recommendation and as such, a Call for
Implementations was made [CfI]:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-webstorage-20111208/
The root of the test suite for this spec follows but currently there are
no tests:
http://w3c-test.org/webapps/WebStorage/tests/
One small typo correction below ...
On 12/12/11 8:47 AM, ext Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
Hi All - the CfCs to publish a WD of the new XHR [1] and a WG Note
of the old XHR [2] resulted in different opinions expressed. We
think it is important to provide a clear message (especially for those
Hi Dan,
WebApps already has a relatively large number of specs in progress (see
[PubStatus]) and the group has agreed to add some additional specs (see
[CharterChanges]). As such, please provide a relatively specific
proposal about the features/specs you and other proponents would like to
To: Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
CC: public-webapps public-webapps@w3.org, Ian Fette ife...@google.com
Hi Arthur,
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com
mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
Hi IanF, All,
Following up on Quota API vis-à
Subject corrected ...
On 12/13/11 7:22 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
As IanF mentioned before, Google would like to add a Quota API to
WebApps' charter and Kinuko has now provided a link to a document that
provides some details about this API:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Quota
Hi All,
The Widgets DigSig spec [W-DigSig] has been sitting in PR for over 4
months now, blocked on the Elliptic Curve PAG [ECC-PAG]. AFAICT, this
PAG has just started its unspecified length Fishing Expedition seeking
some unspecified level of funds to pay for some type of analysis that
will
A Candidate Recommendation of the Widget Interface spec was published today:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-widgets-apis-20111213/
If you have any implementation feedback, please send it to the
public-webapps mail list.
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Dec 13, 2011, at 1:14 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Hi All,
The Widgets DigSig spec [W-DigSig] has been sitting in PR for over 4 months
now, blocked on the Elliptic Curve PAG [ECC-PAG]. AFAICT, this PAG has just
started its unspecified length Fishing Expedition seeking some
This certainly WFM.
TLR, PLH - what needs to be done to make this happen?
-AB
On 12/14/11 2:21 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:
this seems logical, in that any outcome for ECC (ranging from continued
inclusion to removal) would have no impact on widget signature given this
a test suite?
-AB
On 12/13/11 7:23 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
Subject corrected ...
On 12/13/11 7:22 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
As IanF mentioned before, Google would like to add a Quota API to
WebApps' charter and Kinuko has now provided a link to a document
that provides some details
On 12/15/11 11:51 AM, ext Brian LaMacchia wrote:
Hello all,
Sorry for coming to this thread late (I'm on vacation) but I want to comment on
a number of points raised during this thread:
1) Concerning the suggestion to move ECDSA out of XMLDSIG 1.1, that suggestion
is a non-starter for
Hi Brona,
For mostly historical reasons, WebApps' File* specs still use Tracker
rather than Bugzilla (and IIRC, Arun also uses the list archive as well
as the spec itself to track issues for the File API spec):
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/products
For consistency, it would be
TLR, FH, XMLSecWG,
On 12/21/11 6:03 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
Lets go back an look at the options we have to divorce Widgets/XML Dig Sig
from Elliptic Curve:
1. Remove ECC from XML Dig Sig (in my opinion, the right thing to do™):
pros:
- frees both XML Dig Sig and Widgets
Below is an advanced notice that RDFa 1.1 is going back to LC so if
anyone has any pre-LC comments, please send them to
public-rdfa...@w3.org by January 15.
Original Message
Subject:Heads up: RDFa 1.1 headed into Last Call in January 2012
Resent-Date:Thu, 22 Dec
Hi All,
I've been thinking a bit about realistic expectations for 2012 for those
specs that are already in scope in the WG's current charter (complete
spec list is at [PubStatus]).
Below is a list (in alphabetical order) of what I consider the WG's
higher priority specs including my
On 12/29/11 11:18 AM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:
Marcos
My expectation is that we should have a PAG update on progress in the first week of January
(hopefully) and a timeline like Rigo noted, with full resolution of the iPR issue by March - but
only the PAG chair knows the
On 12/29/11 8:48 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote:
I note that
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Websockets-Comments-LC-29Sep2011
claims this was addressed but it was not.
(In the meantime the reference additionally is out-of-date as RFC 6455
has been published a few days later, and not
On 1/3/12 4:22 AM, ext Rigo Wenning wrote:
My aim as PAG chair is to conclude by March. The solution is still open. We
don't know yet whether the algorithms used by XML SIG or ENC really violate
the declared patents. We will hopefully know until then.
I'm still waiting for one response from MIT
.org mailto:public-webapps@w3.org;
Arthur Barstow
Cc: public-xg-htmlspe...@w3.org
mailto:public-xg-htmlspe...@w3.org; Dan Burnett
Subject: Re: HTML Speech XG Completes, seeks feedback for eventual
standardization
We at Google believe
701 - 800 of 1565 matches
Mail list logo
