W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Next step for Touch Events v1: CR or PR?

From: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:21:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFUtAY-6A-dyDzWYEe0DghOZOmOaC9QYb9qkzEgky5JfQxpqXw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Cc: "public-webevents@w3.org" <public-webevents@w3.org>, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Doug Schepers <doug@w3.org>
+1


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:

> All - offlist, Doug said:
>
> [[
> Given the delay caused by the normative dependencies, I don't think it
> much matters which path we take, so I leave it to your judgment.
> ]]
>
> My preference is to not publish a Candidate Recommendation and make the
> next publication a Proposed Recommendation (the W3C process permits this in
> cases where the group has proven interoperability after LC). If anyone has
> any questions, concerns, opinions, +1's, etc. about this, please speak up.
>
> AFAIK, the only open issue before I start a CfC to publish a PR, is the
> comment from Kenny [1]. Matt suggested a non-normative note could be added.
> Matt - please make a proposal (text plus the location of the spec) as a
> reply to [2].
>
> -Thanks, Art
>
> [1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webevents/**
> 2013JanMar/0097.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2013JanMar/0097.html>
> >
> [2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-webevents/**
> 2013JanMar/0109.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webevents/2013JanMar/0109.html>
> >
>
>
>
> On 4/3/13 7:10 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
>
>> Philippe, Doug,
>>
>> The Web Events WG has processed all of the comments for the 24-Jan-2013
>> [LCWD] of the Touch Events v1 spec. The comments resulted in the addition
>> of some non-normative Notes and some minor Web IDL bug fixes but there were
>> no substantive normative changes made (see [Comments]). Additionally, the
>> group already has an Implementation Report [IR] that shows at least two
>> implementations pass each test case. This IR was mentioned in the SotD of
>> the LCWD:
>>
>> [[
>> The WG has completed and approved this specification's Test Suite and
>> created an Implementation Report that shows that two or more independent
>> implementations pass each test.
>> ]]
>>
>> Given the above, may we proceed directly to Proposed Recommendation or do
>> we first have to publish a Candidate Recommendation?
>>
>> (I realize the PR will be blocked until we address the two normative
>> dependencies that are not yet PRs: HTML5 and WebIDL.)
>>
>> -Thanks, Art
>>
>> [LCWD] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-**touch-events-20130124/<http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-touch-events-20130124/>
>> >
>> [Comments] <http://www.w3.org/2010/**webevents/wiki/TouchEvents-**
>> LCWD-24-Jan-2013<http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/TouchEvents-LCWD-24-Jan-2013>
>> >
>> [IR] <http://www.w3.org/2010/**webevents/wiki/TEv1ImplReport<http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/wiki/TEv1ImplReport>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 4 April 2013 16:22:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:35 UTC