W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Length of LC comment period [Was: Ready for LC on the various drafts I edit]

From: Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 08:20:07 -0500
Message-Id: <E3ADACE8-46B0-40DB-8387-B0EAB7972D50@nokia.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
To: ext Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
On Dec 4, 2009, at 7:19 AM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>>
>> If we already have multiple implementations of a spec, I think the
>> spirit of the Recommendation track process suggests a shorter LC  
>> period
>> (say 2 months given the time of the year) and then (assuming no
>> substantive comments) moving the spec to Candidate.
>
> I don't realistically think I'd have time to address the likely  
> volume of
> comments in two months, since I am also dealing with HTML5's last call
> comments in the WHATWG and will likely be starting work on some more
> specifications in January.

Expediting the LC and CR could be important for dependencies. The  
only dependency I know of without searching is the Widget Interface  
spec (which is on schedule to enter CR in Jan) and it has a normative  
dependency on Web Storage.

Thus, another option is to stagger the LC comment periods. For  
example, 1-2 of the more "baked" specs could have a shorter LC period  
e.g. 2-3 months, the medium baked specs 3-4 months, etc. Is something  
like that workable for you, in particular making the exit of LC for  
Web Storage in 2-3 months?

-Art Barstow
Received on Sunday, 6 December 2009 13:21:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:35 GMT