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

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

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:49:17 -0500
Message-ID: <509D421D.7060703@nokia.com>
To: ext Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Tobie Langel <tobie@fb.com>
CC: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, 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
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 9 November 2012 17:50:59 GMT