W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: [editing] Using public-webapps for editing discussion

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 07:33:19 -0400
Message-ID: <4E7B1CFF.7050304@nokia.com>
To: ext Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>
CC: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com>, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, W3C WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 9/19/11 1:56 PM, ext Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Arthur Barstow<art.barstow@nokia.com>  wrote:
>> Since you are the Chair of the HTML Editing APIs CG [CG], would you please
>> explain what you see as the relationship between the CG and WebApps
>> vis--vis the Editing spec? In particular, what role(s) do the CG and WG
>> have?
> I notice you asked a more general question here too that I didn't
> answer.  My take is that the CG will be the group that publishes the
> editing spec for the foreseeable future.  However, all discussion and
> development should occur in preexisting, established fora, preferably
> in the W3C.  This means using fora that are specific to particular
> Working Groups, such as public-webapps, even though those Working
> Groups aren't formally involved in developing the editing spec.
>
> So currently, I don't see the WebApps WG as having any official role
> in developing the editing spec.  I'd only like to be able to use its
> discussion list, since a lot of interested parties are already
> subscribed.

It seems to me, that by virtue of using public-webapps, it does give 
WebApps WG a role e.g. to at least comment on the CG's editing spec. 
[Whether such a role is "official" or not is probably just "splitting 
hairs".]

And speaking of the spec, would you please clarify which spec is in 
scope for the CG:

http://aryeh.name/spec/editing/editing.html
or:
https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/

> Eventually, if it turns out to be necessary to move the
> spec to the REC track (although I hope it's not),

Would you also please explain what you mean by your hoping it will *not* 
be necessary for the editing spec to move to the W3C's Recommendation 
track (f.ex. why do you feel this way)?

Is there consensus within the CG to not move the spec to the REC track?

-AB
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2011 11:34:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:47 GMT