W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: RfC: moving Web Storage to WG Note; deadline June 29

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:50:17 -0400
Message-ID: <4E022B59.2090809@nokia.com>
To: ext Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Jun/20/2011 6:37 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2011-06-20 13:58, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:54:12 +0200, Julian Reschke
>>> <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  wrote:
>>>> As recently discussed in the HTMLWG -- you can have Note that is
>>>> normative; it's just a signal that work on this has ended.
>>> 1) You do not get patent policy protection. 2) The work has not ended if
>>> the feature is still part of the web platform.
>> Dunno about patents. But "work has ended" is supposed to mean that the
>> WG is done with it, AFAIU.
> We could just publish it as a REC and say we're done with it, too.

Indeed, one disadvantage of moving Web Storage to a WG Note is that it 
would _not_ have any patent commitments.

Regarding some of the process aspects of this proposal, although the 
decision to publish WDs and LCWDs is effectively left to the WG, the 
decision to publish further maturity levels requires other participants: 
Candidate Recommendations require Director's approval and the decision 
to publish a Recommendation is subject to feedback from the entire W3C 
Membership (WebApps includes only 24 of the 325 W3C Members).

I mention this because off-list I heard a comment that suggested 
Storage's mutex issue conflicts with a Recommendation's requirement that 
"the ideas in the technical report are appropriate for widespread 
deployment" [1]. Naturally, some will disagree with this view, 
especially given the broad implementation of this spec.

Anyhow, only a small set of participants have responded to this RfC so 
_I encourage others that have not responded to please submit their 
feedback_.

-Thanks, AB

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#rec-publication
Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2011 17:51:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:45 GMT