Re: [sensors] [meta] Wide review tracker

@dontcallmedom and @xfq, below I drafted a proposal for the wide review announcement to be sent to public-review-announce@w3.org using the [RfC Template], please take a look:

```
Subject: RfC: wide review of Generic Sensor API Pre-CR WD
To: public-review-announce@w3.org
Bcc: chairs@w3.org
Reply-to: public-device-apis@w3.org

Hi,

The Device and Sensors Working Group requests review of the following specifications
before 2017-12-31:

   Generic Sensor API
   https://www.w3.org/TR/generic-sensor/

And the following concrete sensors that extend the Generic Sensor API:

   Ambient Light Sensor
   https://www.w3.org/TR/ambient-light/

   Accelerometer
   https://www.w3.org/TR/accelerometer/
   
   Gyroscope
   https://www.w3.org/TR/gyroscope/

   Magnetometer
   https://www.w3.org/TR/magnetometer/

   Orientation Sensor
   https://www.w3.org/TR/orientation-sensor/

The group requests feedback via the respective specifications' GitHub repositories,
or via email to public-device-apis@w3.org.

These publications are Pre-Candidate Recommendation Drafts under the 2014 Process [1]. 
Therefore, the group is looking for confirmation that it has satisfied its relevant
technical requirements and dependencies with other groups.

Thanks,

-Anssi (Device and Sensors WG Chair)

[1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/DocumentReview
```

In addition, my plan is to tailor separate wide review request mails or GitHub issues based on the above to the following (horizontal) groups indicating the focus areas of the wide review for each (inspired by the [das-review proposal] and [previous wide review request]):

- [ ] TAG for overall design and integration in the platform (draft at #319)
- [ ] webappsec@w3.org for Permissions, Feature Policy, Secure Contexts
- [ ] public-privacy@w3.org for privacy considerations
- [ ] public-web-security@w3.org for security considerations
- [ ] www-style@w3.org for Ambient Light Sensor
- [ ] public-webvr@w3.org for intersection with movement detection in WebVR; reuse in gamepad extensions; magnetic input for WebVR via Magnetometer
- [ ] public-webapps@w3.org for Web IDL

Some specific questions:

* Accessibility and Internationalization. It [was proposed] that the specifications in questions do not touch these domains and as such we do not need to complete the respective questionnaires, and may not need to ask explicit wide review feedback from these horizontal groups. Is it enough of a paper trail to document the decision in this meta issue? Is the public-review-announce@ request enough, or should we reach out to these groups direct?

* Should we use the latest ED, latest TR, or a dated version of a TR in the wide review request? I think TAG will prefer the bleeding edge so planned to give them the EDs. For public-review-announce@ I proposed we use the latest TR since the request talks about "Pre-Candidate Recommendation Drafts". Recommendations?

* The subject line is a bit wordy, but it tries to follow the established best practice. Note I only included "Generic Sensor API" and not the concrete sensors in the subject line. How to improve? 

* Should we add more background into the review request or can we assume people with interest will find and read the Generic Sensor API introduction section themselves? I feel a concise mail might work better.

[RfC Template]: https://www.w3.org/wiki/DocumentReview#Request_for_Comments_.28RfC.29_Template
[das-review proposal]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Aug/0017.html
[previous wide review request]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-review-announce/2016Sep/0007.html
[was proposed]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2017Oct/0012.html

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by anssiko
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/299#issuecomment-337843689 using your GitHub account

Received on Thursday, 19 October 2017 08:55:06 UTC