- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 09:48:37 -0400
- To: public-coremob@w3.org
On 3/10/13 7:12 AM, ext Jo Rabin wrote: > http://www.w3.org/community/coremob/2013/03/10/next-steps-for-w3c-coremob-2013-03-10/ So I see two important messages here and I trust there is consensus on these ... 1. If you want to actively contribute to W3C testing efforts, join public-test-infra. 2. If you want to actively engage with developers, contribute to WebPlatform.org. Re new scope, depending on how one squints, I think CoreMob was originally mostly about "minding the gaps". As such, I recommend merging this group and Dom's public-closing-the-gaps group. ATM, there is 100% overlap between these two groups regarding people that have submitted something to the gaps list. It seems like it will be mostly make work to try to rationalize the two groups so it would be more efficient to just merge the efforts now. Re continued spec work, does anyone have any real data about how the CoreMob spec was actually used (other than as an input to public-test-infra)? For instance did any proprietary browser vendor or OSS browser engine implement feature X/Y/Z specifically because that feature/spec was listed in CoreMob? Re IG vs. CG, I can see +/- both ways but it seems to me that the most efficient thing to do is to continue this group as is and rather than debate group structure, spend energy on #1 or #2 above or The Gaps stuff. -AB
Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 13:49:07 UTC