Thanks to you both, and to the more silent members of the majority. :) It looks like we have confirmation of our consensus to adopt the document into this group's set of deliverables. +Ian Clelland <iclelland@google.com>, would you mind sending an Intent to Migrate <https://wicg.github.io/admin/intent-to-migrate.html> to the WICG, and generating an FPWD version of the document so we can follow this up with a CfC for publication? -mike On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:00 AM Giorgio Maone <giorgio@maone.net> wrote: > On 06/11/18 21:03, Oda, Terri wrote: > > I'll add my voice to the silent support chorus (since I know it's > sometimes nice to have an indicator that someone actually read the email > and associated documents): this does indeed look like it fits the charter > and I approve of the adoption. > > +1 > > -- G > > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 1:29 AM Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote: > >> Hey folks! >> >> As discussed at TPAC >> <https://www.w3.org/2018/10/23-webappsec-minutes.html#item08>, there's >> interest in migrating Feature Policy >> <https://wicg.github.io/feature-policy/> out of the WICG, and into >> WebAppSec. There were no objections at the time, with general agreement >> that it fit into our existing charter's scope >> <https://www.w3.org/2011/webappsec/charter-2017.html> pretty cleanly. >> I'd like to make sure the rest of the group feels similarly. >> >> This, therefore, is a call for consensus regarding Feature Policy's >> adoption into this working group. If you have any concerns with this >> adoption, please respond here by November 7th. Silence will be interpreted >> as support. :) >> >> If we generally agree to adopt the deliverable, the next steps will be to >> send an Intent to Migrate >> <https://wicg.github.io/admin/intent-to-migrate.html> to the WICG, and >> to move into another CfC to publish the incubated document as a FPWD. Ah, >> process... >> >> Thanks! >> >> -mike >> > >
Received on Friday, 9 November 2018 10:45:11 UTC