Re: [battery] Call for Consensus: resolve LC-2965 to proceed with Battery API as-is, consider alternatives for v2 from Tobie Langel on 2014-09-15 (public-device-apis@w3.org from September 2014)

From: Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:54:30 +0200
To: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
Cc: Device APIs Working Group <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAMK=o4dAzee2u9wFdw1GvLe=ZrrZ-HHxbP2pMnxu_b4BZS=28w@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com> wrote:

> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to resolve the Battery API Last Call
> issue LC-2965.
>
> We had a resolution on the teleconference but as a courtesy to those who
> are unable to attend the call we are following up with a CfC.

Much appreciated. Understand the rationale (wasn't expecting anything
different tbh). Glad this sparked a conversation for more consistency
across those APIs and related WebIDL issues.

--tobie

Received on Monday, 15 September 2014 20:54:59 UTC