Re: Standby API Specification Proposal

Le mardi 20 mai 2014 à 18:15 -0400, Dominique Hazael-Massieux a écrit :
> > But would be great to get an official blessing.
> 
> I'm checking what process (if any) we should follow to determine whether
> we can reasonably call this in scope for our current charter.

So from what I've gathered, this would be determined by the W3C Director
approval (or lack thereof) of a FPWD; such a FWPD would also necessarily
results from approval from the WG to proceed with such a work item.

To reduce the delay of uncertainty, maybe we could first run a CfC in
the group to determine whether the group considers this in scope of its
charter; and if there is such consensus, I could then try to get a early
assessment from the Director. Failing at any of these steps, we could
move to recharter the group.

> But this process considerations should not prevent work from starting on
> a converged API; assuming interested parties are willing to do the work
> in this group, we can always go through the rechartering process if this
> ends up being needed.

Based on a subsequent thread in the brand new specifiction forum [1], I
have drafted a very rough proposal that would fulfill the use cases that
have been discussed:
http://w3c.github.io/screen-wake/navigator_poke.html (see also
https://github.com/w3c/screen-wake)

It is pretty different from the similar APIs in this space:
https://github.com/w3c-webmob/web-api-gap/blob/master/features/screen-wake.md (which means it's probably not the easiest path to convince implementors)

Dom

1.
http://discourse.specifiction.org/t/allow-developers-to-control-wake-lock-aka-disable-auto-dimming/

Received on Friday, 23 May 2014 15:58:01 UTC