- From: Jay Munro <jaymunro@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 17:50:27 +0000
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- CC: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, "public-canvas-api@w3.org" <public-canvas-api@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <42a6f28b786c40d7a2402d3db7a2e8e9@BY2PR03MB521.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
This would seem that it would be ok to push to L2, and take them out of CR completely if it's going to spin like this. Not sure a separate spec would change the speed of that. From: Rik Cabanier [mailto:cabanier@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 6, 2013 9:41 AM To: Jay Munro Cc: Robin Berjon; Edward O'Connor; public-canvas-api@w3.org Subject: Re: News from TPac My biggest fear is that regardless of how quickly we can fix the focus ring bugs, people from either side will keep stalling the process. Dominic from Google has expressed doubts and Ryosuke from Apple was very skeptical about the general API. In addition, someone from the A11Y team told me that they don't like the focus rings and want to redesign everything. Given this, I'd rather work on it separately so we're not in the same situation 4 months from now. On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Jay Munro <jaymunro@microsoft.com<mailto:jaymunro@microsoft.com>> wrote: It would be great to do that. This was an option I heard came up at TPAC and I wanted to hear more. The idea of a simple add on might take less time, but I'd rather see the full spec get through in a few months. -----Original Message----- From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@w3.org<mailto:robin@w3.org>] Sent: Friday, December 6, 2013 2:02 AM To: Edward O'Connor; public-canvas-api@w3.org<mailto:public-canvas-api@w3.org> Subject: Re: News from TPac Hi all, On 06/12/2013 01:09 , Edward O'Connor wrote: > I don't understand why L2 is necessarily a big spec that will take a > long time. Why not envision an L2 which is exactly the same as the > "extension (mini) spec" you have in mind? Features that are unrelated > can wait until L3. The labels we give these specs don't mean anything, > don't require us to spend more or less time on them, and don't imply > anything about taking a few months v. a few years to work on them. What Ted said. There is nothing that says that shipping has to be a heavy process. We can ship iterations of Recommendations (or CRs, or whatever) with just the sort of small delta you mention. Nothing wrong with having multiple releases a year if they work. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 17:51:10 UTC