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

On 11/9/12 12:32 PM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 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.

Agree and that is one reason I included Tobie in the To: list. Tobie?

>> (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.

Sorry, but I'm not familiar with "the fast-track path" wrt AC charter 
reviews.

WebApps' charter sets an expectation an AC review is mandatory in this 
case (where a feature is moved from HTML5 spec to WebApps #Charter). The 
charter does state WG members will not have to rejoin WebApps. I didn't 
notice anything in the charter itself that would preclude an AC review 
comment on other parts of the charter.

-Thanks, AB

#Charter http://www.w3.org/2012/03/webapps-proposed-charter.html#others




>
> Cheers,
> Maciej
>

Received on Friday, 9 November 2012 17:50:59 UTC