- From: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 17:03:35 -0400
- To: Device and Sensors Working Group <public-device-apis@w3.org>
- Cc: cooper@w3.org
forwarded with permission > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org> > Subject: Re: RfC: Wide review of Wake Lock API; deadline August 31st > Date: July 12, 2016 at 12:10:52 PM EDT > To: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>, janina@rednote.net > > Hi - thanks for reaching out to us for review. The APA WG took a look at this spec a couple months ago and determined we have no comments to file, so you can consider the horizontal review from APA complete. > > I removed most of the carbon copies in this reply to reduce noise to people not directly involved in this reply. If you would like a copy of this response in an archived location, feel free to bounce it or give me an address to resend it. > > Michael, for APA > > > On 11/07/2016 8:41 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote: >> Dear Chairs of APA WG, PING, WebAppSec WG, Web Platform WG, TAG, CSS WG, Web Perf WG: >> >> The Device & Sensors Working Group is soliciting the review of your groups on the Wake Lock API on our way to Candidate Recommendation status: >> https://www.w3.org/TR/wake-lock/ >> >> From APA, PING and WebAppSec, we hope to get a review from an accessibility, privacy and security perspective of the specification. >> >> We particularly call upon the attention of the WebAppSec WG on the proposed approach to manage permissions to use the Wake Lock API, whereby an embedded cross-origin browsing context is never allowed, as described in the first note in section 5. >> >> For both WebAppSec and PING, we note that the group used the self-review questionnaire in the development of this specification: >> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2016Mar/att-0038/00-part >> >> From WebPlatform and TAG, we hope to get a review of the overall API and its insertion in the rest of the platform. >> >> Since the API extends the Screen interface defined by the CSS WG in the CSSOM View module, the CSS WG might wish to confirm this extension is in-line with the design of the interface. >> >> Likewise, since the API relies on the Page Visibility state defined by the WebPerf WG, that group might wish to comment on the proper usage of that signal. >> >> Reviews from other groups are also naturally welcome. >> >> We would appreciate to receive your feedback before the end of August; the preferred method for feedback is to file issues in our github repository: https://github.com/w3c/wake-lock/issues ; >> >> alternatively, send a mail to our public mailing list public-device-apis@w3.org with a subject prefixed with [wake-lock]. >> >> Thank you >> >> regards, Frederick >> >> Frederick Hirsch >> Device & Sensors Working Group Chair >> >> @fjhirsch >> >> >> >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2016 21:04:05 UTC