- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:32:26 +0200
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 2011-10-07 13:55, Arthur Barstow wrote: > Hi Julian, All - I changed the subject to reflect the general > process-related issue here. I will respond separately to the WebSocket > specifics ... > > WebApps has always used the Edit First, Review Second process, as > documented in our [WorkMode] document. > > Overall, I think the process has worked reasonably well, yet it can > create some challenges, especially as a spec enters the later maturity > levels i.e. LC and later. > > For specs in LC or later, I think the Editor(s) should feel free to make > minor changes e.g. editorial changes and bug fixes that would not > invalidate an implementation, without any explicit notification to the > group. However, for major changes e.g. a new feature or a bug fix that > would affect an implementation, I think it is reasonable to expect the > Editor(s) to make some type of explicit notification and that could be > done via an e-mail, bug report, new issue (e.g. Tracker), etc. > ... OK, so it would be helpful to understand whether the change I noticed (adding a section about ws-specific URL parsing that was removed from the protocol spec) is considered editorial or a bug fix. As far as I recall, we agreed in the IETF WG that parsing of web socket URIs should work exactly the same way as for any other URI scheme. It appears that the API spec now tries to override this, and this looks problematic to me. Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 7 October 2011 12:32:58 UTC