W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [widgets] P&C Last Call comments, viewmodes, referencing other specs, guarantee of consistency

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:36:58 -0400
Message-Id: <62B60A9B-17BA-4147-B658-74DC92B8715B@nokia.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>, Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>, Bryan Sullivan <BS3131@att.com>
Marcin, Marcos, All,

On Jun 3, 2009, at 12:14 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:

> On 6/3/09 5:54 PM, Marcin Hanclik wrote:
>> Hi Marcos,
>>
>>>> I am not sure whether the item 3 is satisfied.
>>> What do you mean?
>> For example:
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-widgets-20090528/#the-widget-element
>> "viewmodes
>>      A keyword list attribute that denotes the view modes  
>> supported the widget. The value SHOULD be one or more of the  
>> following valid view modes as defined in the [Widgets-Views]  
>> specification: application, floating, fullscreen, mini, or all. ..."
>>
>> The question is: which spec is more normative here? P&C or non- 
>> existing Widgets-Views?
>> As a WUA vendor I would like to support all possible values.
>> As a widget developer I am interesting in knowing all the options  
>> I have.
>
> I understand. Like I said, we are working as quickly as we can.  
> There is
> nothing we can do about this. The values are settled on; but they need
> to be spec'ed properly.

Perhaps one of the things that adds some confusion here is the P&C's  
[Widgets-Views] reference is to the "Widgets 1.0: Media Query  
Extension" spec whereas I believe the plan of record is for that  
reference to point to a completely different document (for which  
there currently is no Editor's Draft), probably titled something like  
"Widgets 1.0: {Window,View} Modes".

As all of us that have attended the weekly calls over the last few  
months know, the priorities have been P&C, DigSig and A&E, and Marcos  
in particular has done an exceptional job to move those specs forward.


>>>> Marcin, there is only a limited number of editors. We are doing the
>>>> best we can to pump out specs. But there is only so many hours  
>>>> in the
>>>> day.
>> I can help you. Shall I answer formally to:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009AprJun/ 
>> 0503.html
>
> We already have editors for the specs; it's just that the editors are
> caught up over editing. What we need is reviewers. The more reviews we
> get, the quicker we move. If you want to really help, keep reviewing
> what we already have. Your review of P&C has been very helpful.

Robin and Marcos have agreed to be Editors of the View Modes spec. As  
always, what we need is specific inputs. Marcin, if you have some  
inputs for the View Modes spec, please send them to the list. Note  
too that last week, Bryan agreed to provide input for the View Modes  
spec [1].

-Regards, Art Barstow

[1] http://www.w3.org/2009/05/28-wam-minutes.html#item06
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 19:39:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT