[battery] CfC concluded: publish new LC draft of Battery API

 The CfC to publish a new Last Call draft of the Battery API has concluded without objection (and we’ve had general agreement on the calls to publish).

I will go ahead with the publication request.

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
Chair DAP
@fjhirsch



On Aug 11, 2014, at 3:52 PM, Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com> wrote:

> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a new Last Call of the Battery API working draft on 28 August 2014 with a 5 week last call period, ending 2 October 2014.
> 
> In May 2012 we published a Candidate Recommendation  of the Battery API [1] and received implementer feedback, moving us to an asynchronous promises-based solution, as in the current Editors Draft [2]. Subsequently we’ve carefully reviewed and received feedback on this draft, creating new issues [3] which we have resolved with updates to the editors draft [4].
> 
> At this point I am aware of no open issues with the Battery API draft.
> 
> To avoid confusion with the very old synchronous draft it is imperative that we publish a new update; given that we have no open issues and have been receiving implementer feedback I believe a Last Call is entirely appropriate. 
> 
> The status section upon publication will list the changes and should provide a link to a diff and implementation report. Here is the current editors draft language on changes:
> 
> [[
> 
> The following changes have been made since the last published version:
> 
> 	• Expose BatteryManager via getBattery() returning a Promise instead of a synchronous accessor. (Section 5)
> 	• Clarify default values when a BatteryManager object is created. (Section 6)
> 	• Specify the behavior when a host device has more than one battery. (Section 6.1)
> 
> ]]
> 
> Please note that we will continue to progress this draft under the old W3C process, given there is no advantage to switch at this point (please set the appropriate ReSpec flag in the publication process).
> 
> Please indicate support or concern regarding this CfC by replying to this message by 21 August  - silence will be considered agreement (explicit agreement, even just a +1 preferred). Earlier responses would be helpful.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> regards, Frederick
> 
> Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
> Chair DAP
> @fjhirsch
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-battery-status-20120508/
> 
> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/battery/Overview.html
> 
> [3] https://www.w3.org/2009/dap/track/products/24
> 
> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2014Aug/0034.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 25 August 2014 14:18:45 UTC