- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 06:53:05 -0400
- To: ext Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 5/8/12 3:56 AM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > I think it would be reasonable to defer the feature requested in 15210 to a future version of Web Sockets API. It would also be reasonable to include it if anyone feels strongly. Was a reason cited for why 15210 should be considered critical? I could not find one in the minutes. Anne is the person that mentioned 15210 <http://www.w3.org/2012/05/02-webapps-minutes.html#item08>. Anne - would you please clarify Opera's position re whether 15210 is critical for this first version of Web Sockets? -Thanks, AB > > Cheers, > Maciej > > > On May 3, 2012, at 3:41 PM, Arthur Barstow<art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: > >> During WebApps' May 2 discussion about the Web Sockets API CR, four Sockets API bugs were identified as high priority to fix: 16157, 16708, 16703 and 15210. Immediately after that discussion, Hixie checked in fixes for 16157, 16708 and 16703and these changes will require the spec going back to LC. >> >> Since 15210 remains open, before I start a CfC for a new LC, I would like some feedback on whether the new LC should be blocked until 15210 is fixed, or if we should move toward a new LC without the fix (and thus consider 15210 for the next version of the spec). If you have any comments, please send them by May 10. >> >> -AB >> >> [Mins] http://www.w3.org/2012/05/02-webapps-minutes.html#item08 >> [CR] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/CR-websockets-20111208/ >> [Bugz] http://tinyurl.com/Bugz-Web-Socket-API >> [15210] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15210 >>
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 10:54:01 UTC