W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > June 2008

RE: Dedicated Geolocation List and Channel

From: Sunava Dutta <sunavad@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:59:17 -0700
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: Web API public <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <083D18C6B9B71F4CBCA7B76D97B748310C7D4904D7@NA-EXMSG-W601.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>

Inline...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-webapi-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webapi-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Maciej Stachowiak
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:44 AM
> To: Doug Schepers
> Cc: Web API public
> Subject: Re: Dedicated Geolocation List and Channel
>
>
>
> On Jun 3, 2008, at 11:19 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:
>
> > Hi, Maciej-
> >
> > Maciej Stachowiak wrote (on 6/3/08 1:53 PM):
> >> At this point I am really confused about where to discuss
> >> geolocation APIs, and I would rather not have it bounce back and
> >> forth. Maybe we should just wait until the chartering process
> >> reaches its conclusion.
> >
> > There's nothing to be confused about.  Regardless where the
> > deliverable ends up, whether in the proposed Geolocation WG, or the
> > WebApps WG, the *discussion list* will be the same:
> >
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-geolocation/
> > public-geolocation@w3.org
>
> Well I'm pretty interested in coordinating with Google, Opera and
> Mozilla on this and it seems like they were interested in keeping the
> work and discussion here. It's true that you announced a new mailing
> list but it doesn't seem like anyone here asked for it. If it's going
> to be a mailing list for the WebApps WG, then maybe it would be good
> for the WG to discuss whether we want a separate list.[Sunava Dutta]

[Sunava Dutta] I think Doug's point is that there are more parties (and industries) that are affected by this. Of course, working with other browser vendors AND other invested parties is important.
>
> > I would strongly encourage folks to join and start discussions now,
> > rather than waiting.  A chartering period, with the review from W3C
> > Management and the Advisory Committee, takes at least 6 weeks, and
> > that doesn't include the time have preliminary discussions about it
> > and to write the charter.  Hixie indicated that Google did not want
> > to wait even 2 weeks, and I agree that keeping momentum is a high
> > priority. Naturally, if Apple wants to wait until the chartering
> > period is over, that's your prerogative, but it doesn't seem like a
> > good use of time and energy.
>
> Well, I wasn't that confused about where disucussion should go until
> you asked everyone to move discussion to a new list, when folks seemed
> happy to have it here.

[Sunava Dutta] I think Doug makes some very good points here. MSFT's stand based on the considerations that Doug has raised is that it should go to a new WG. There are teams here that do not need to be randomized with other WebApps conversations (that I participate in) but are nonetheless invested in GeoLocations. There is no additional burden for me to join a new list/WG and I'm glad to do so.
>
> > I sense that, for some reason, people are feeling territorial about
> > this issue, and I'm not sure why.  Can you please articulate what
> > your concerns about this happening in WebApps are, rather than in a
> > dedicated WG?
>
> I don't have any concerns about this being in WebApps. I think that
> would be a great option.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2008 23:03:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 June 2008 23:03:29 GMT