W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2012

Re: Draft: Plan and next steps for AppCache.NG

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 09:32:23 -0800
Cc: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>, ext Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>, Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, Mike Smith <mike@w3.org>, Doug Schepers <doug@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>, Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <sicking@mozilla.com>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, www-archive@w3.org
Message-id: <EAA10C5E-AC80-43DC-8328-65280C318C0F@apple.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>

On Nov 9, 2012, at 9:27 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:

> 
> What is your expectation re the role or non-role of the Fixing AppCache CG re AppCache.NG? Will the CG close and _all_ AppCache.NG work be done by WebApps (on public-webapps)? Will the CG have some role e.g. working on UCs and Requirements? [I just noticed it's a relatively small group (31 people) although I didn't try to intersect the mail lists.]

>From my point of view that is for the Web Apps WG and the Fixing AppCache CG to work out; most particularly those individuals in either or both who will be active in the AppCache NG work.

> 
> (BTW, I agree with those that interpret WebApps' charter such that the charter will need to be formally updated to add AppCache.NG.)

By "formally updated" do you mean the fast-track path to add a deliverable with AC approval, or a full recharter? It is still not totally clear to me which is expected.

Cheers,
Maciej
Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 17:33:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 9 November 2012 17:33:00 GMT