W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sysapps@w3.org > June 2013

Re: status of phase 1 work items?

From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:45:30 +0100
To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Cc: "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <28C15A5CCEF147ABBC22C121F3F3E9EF@marcosc.com>
Hi Dave,  

On Thursday, June 20, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Dave Raggett wrote:

> We now have first public working drafts for all of the phase 1 work  
> items with the exception of App URI, and the manifest extension spec.

Actually, app: uri was published a while back:  
http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-app-uri-20130516/

> Several of the specs have been updated since the FPWD was published, and  
> are candidates for updated public working drafts. Any suggestions for  
> which ones are ready, or soon will be?

I would not be in favor of republishing any of the specs until we feel they are ready for LC (or only to meet the heartbeat requirement). In the specs we have published so far, we are still dealing with the feedback from public-script-coord.  
> I am also interested in a crisper understanding of where we are in  
> respect to the manifest and App URI work items.

I want to layer app: URI on top of the fetch spec [1] (it's mostly a cosmetic change). But apart from that, app: URI just needs a test suite, the privacy aspects need to be tightened, and then it's ready for LC.  

Anyone wanna help with the test suite? ;)  
> We handed the JSON  
> manifest format over to WebApps, with the understanding that we would  
> develop an extension spec to cover the specific requirements for  
> SysApps.

Right, those extensions remain in the runtime spec for now.  

See:
http://runtime.sysapps.org/#manifest
  
> WebApps have started discussion on the manifest format, along  
> with the realization that it should be usable for ebooks as well as  
> packaged apps.

It will be interesting to see where the discussion goes with regards to ebooks… there are already popular formats for ebooks (e.g., ePub).  
> However, I am now quite sure where things stand with  
> respect to the SysApps extension spec, and the SysApps AppURI spec.
>  
> A further question is where are in respect to starting phase 2? Am I  
> correct in assuming that we are already welcoming contributions on use  
> cases and requirements? Are we expecting to see draft specifications in  
> time for the Toronto face to face in late August?

I don't think we should rush into those unless we have editorial resources (and currently we are stretched pretty thin). IMHO, we should continue to work hard towards getting the current Phase 1 specs to Last Call by the Toronto meeting.   

Kind regards,
Marcos  

[1] http://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/  
--  
Marcos Caceres
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 16:46:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:36:13 UTC