- From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (ATTCINW) <BS3131@att.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:15:16 -0700
- To: "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>, <public-device-apis@w3.org>
We would not be in favor of this transfer. We believe this API needs to be developed in the DAP group, as our vision for its functionality was driven by the input from BONDI and in general as a *device* API (as compared to an abstracted API for cloud-based file resources), and we do not believe that vision will be fulfilled if this work is transferred to Webapps. If the issue is the level of discussion in this group, that can be addressed. For one, I have seen quite a lot of traffic on the DAP email list about this, so I don't understand the question of activity. But to start, I will address some of the open topics in the current draft on the DAP list, to help get the discussion moving faster. Thanks, Bryan Sullivan | AT&T -----Original Message----- From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Robin Berjon Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 6:33 AM To: public-device-apis@w3.org Subject: Transferring File* to WebApps - redux Hi all, as mentioned last week, there is talk of potentially transferring the File * deliverables to WebApps where they are being far more actively discussed (or even, discussed at all). This transfer naturally needs to be ratified by the DAP WG, a decision that will be on this week's call. Since my previous email on the topic elicited no response whatsoever, I'm sending this one as a reminder to make sure that no one missed the previous one. Enough administrativia, you may now return to productive work :) -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 15 June 2010 20:16:38 UTC