W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-geolocation@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Geolocation Errata and Updated Working Draft

From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 14:33:55 +0100
Message-ID: <CAF40kP4AcJqXqYKvWSFHdTVKKc=CNtEcmfYCafvhkPwfTa83FA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Mandyam, Giridhar" <mandyam@quicinc.com>
Cc: public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
Hi Giri, please find some notes below.

In http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/ it states that NoInterfaceObject "must not
be specified on partial interface definitions". So in section 5.1 it must
not be specified for "partial interface Navigator".

The wrong sections of 5.2 have been deleted. The meaning of the
PositionOptions attributes should not be deleted. Instead, the sections
describing their default values must be deleted as that is now expressed in

Some changes have already been made in Blink to conform to these errata,
but there is no true support yet for dictionaries. This is tracked in http:/

Also, who is our new staff contact?



On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Mandyam, Giridhar <mandyam@quicinc.com>

> Hello All,
> Earlier this year, we discussed and agreed on the list a set of
> corrections that the first Geolocation API needed to align with WebIDL
> constraints:
>  http://www.w3.org/2008/geolocation/geoapi-errata.html
> To make sure that readers of the Geolocation API specification know about
> these corrections, and in the spirit of the W3C Process, we need to work on
> publishing an updated version of the Geolocation Recommendation that
> integrates these errata. To that end, the W3C has a shortened "Edited
> Recommendation" process that I suggest we pursue.
> Jinsong Wang (who was our Staff contact until a few weeks ago) had
> prepared an editors draft of the Geolocation API that integrates the errata
> into the main spec:
> http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html
> The diff between that draft and the Recommendation is visible at:
> http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2F2013%2FREC-geolocation-API-20131024%2F&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org%2Fgeo%2Fapi%2Fspec-source.html
> The next step in that Edited Recommendation process is to get explicit
> reviews from the members of this group on the edited draft - as a strawman
> proposal, I suggest feedback (which can take the form of "+1" in the best
> of cases) be sent in the upcoming 2 week (before July 11) — but let me know
> if you would like more time.
> Once we have had clear review and approval from the group, we will publish
> an updated Working Draft to get review from the broader community. At the
> same time, we will want to update our test suite (where needed) to reflect
> the changes:
>  http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/test-suite/ (which we will probably want to
> migrate to https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/ at the same time,
> as some people have started working towards
> https://github.com/w3c/web-platform-tests/issues?labels=geolocation-API&page=1&state=open
> )
> In particular, it is rather critical that these changes match what
> implementations are or will be shipping — feedback from implementers on
> whether and when they plan to adopt these changes will be particular
> important.
> Thank you,
> -Giri Mandyam, Geolocation Working Group Chair
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2014 13:34:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:51:08 UTC