W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > November 2009

RE: DAP Roadmap, priorities

From: <richard.tibbett@orange-ftgroup.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:11:22 +0100
Message-ID: <355A518BC0575547B2A3D6773AAF8EEF5DE995@ftrdmel1>
To: <dom@w3.org>, <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Hi Dom,

Following a fair amount of discussion on the list I have started
drafting the initial Calendar API spec.

This draft is not yet complete as I'm working more actively on the
Contacts API.

These two APIs are similar in design and complimentary to each other so
for me it's practical to work on them in parallel.

Hsving said that, if anyone else would like to co-edit Calendar or
Contacts, please let me know.

Kind Regards,

Richard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> Dominique Hazael-Massieux
> Sent: 10 November 2009 10:29
> To: public-device-apis
> Subject: DAP Roadmap, priorities
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Per my ACTION-60, I have started working on a roadmap for our 
> WG deliverables at:
> http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/#roadmap
> 
> I have listed at the top the APIs that were identified as our 
> priorities in one of our early teleconfs [1], although we 
> didn't make it a formal resolution as far as I can tell. The 
> APIs we agree to work on in priority [2] are:
> * Contacts
> * Calendar
> * Filesystems
> * Messaging
> 
> Note that at this time, we only have active work on the 
> Contacts API in that list, and some discussions around 
> Filesystems - the lack of work on the two others is somewhat 
> worrying. I think it would be useful to get people 
> volunteering to come up with Editors drafts for Calendar and 
> Messaging at the very least.
> 
> I have heard several people thinking that the 
> photo/audio/video capture API should also be a priority 
> (myself included, actually), so maybe this is something we 
> should reconsider.
> 
> I would be also useful if the WG could approve the rough 
> schedule (ideally after having agreed on more specifics for 
> the priority APIs).
> 
> I haven't put any policy-related spec in the table, since I 
> don't think we have a very clear idea on how they are going 
> to be articulated at this point; but when/if we do, we should 
> definitely add them to the table.
> 
> Ideally, we should discuss that roadmap each time we fall 
> behind schedule on any of the priority items and update it 
> after that discussion. I hope the Chairs can take 
> responsibility for this, but I'll try to watch this as well.
> 
> I have also started listing API that we will not work on (per 
> previous discussions), as well as APIs that have been 
> suggested for future work (which matches Robin's ACTION-56), 
> although that latter list might be usefully moved to a wiki 
> page as suggesting in the said action item.
> 
> Dom
> 
> 1.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Sep
/att-0050/Device_APIs_and_Policy_Working_Group_Teleconference_-->
_16_Sep_2009.htm#item07
> 2. this also takes of Robin's ACTION-55; this might also take 
> care of Frederick's ACTION-57, although this is not in the wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2009 20:11:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:01 GMT