Re: Timeline for HTML

On 06/07/2017 12:14, Alex Danilo wrote:
> I've done a bunch of work today to get this into shape. There is zero 
> chance this can be finished this week.

Thanks Alex.

> 
> I'm going to continue tomorrow and will try to find some time over the 
> weekend as well but there is a lot to do.

Understood, and again, thanks for putting in the time on this.

> 
> Will update on Monday, in the meantime it would be good to get some 
> confirmation on your time-line for Rec to see if it matches up to what 
> fits in for this year.

Have pinged Chaals for confirmation. There may be places we can trim it, 
but I'll leave it to him to confirm/deny.


> 
> Thanks,
> Alex
> P.S. Unless Josh wants to produce a mega-PR :-)
Josh, if there is anything you can do to help Alex with this, it really 
would be appreciated. Thanks.

> 
> On 5 July 2017 at 18:54, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk 
> <mailto:tink@tink.uk>> wrote:
> 
>     Thanks Alex. Appreciate anything you can do.
> 
> 
> 
>     On 05/07/2017 07:24, Alex Danilo wrote:
> 
>         Hi Léonie,
> 
>         This change is pretty substantial.  I'll have to offload some
>         high priority work to spend extra time on this.
> 
>         Right now, I can't estimate how long it will take so will send
>         an update at the end of tomorrow my time which should let me get
>         a better grasp of the timing.
> 
>         As for Josh, the US has a holiday and I doubt he'll have time to
>         review, we'll need to defer to one of the other editors to do that.
> 
>         Alex
> 
>         On 5 July 2017 at 01:27, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk
>         <mailto:tink@tink.uk> <mailto:tink@tink.uk
>         <mailto:tink@tink.uk>>> wrote:
> 
>              Alex & Josh,
> 
>              The original HTML5.2 timeline [1] is about a month out at
>         present.
>              If we can get issue #829 resolved this week, we should just
>         about be
>              able to get 5.2 to Rec before we run into the Christmas
>         holidays.
>              Much more than a week longer, and we'll be looking at
>         January (and a
>              knock on for HTML5.3 etc.).
> 
>              We really don't want HTML5.2 to move forward without this issue
>              being resolved. IndexedDB has a dependency on it, and it'd
>         be good
>              to move that forward to Rec too, but we need to keep moving
>         on HTML.
> 
>              Questions...
> 
>              1. Can you get this issue resolved and merged by the end of
>         this week?
>              2. If not, what is a realistic timetable?
> 
>              If this issue is resolved by the end of this week, our
>         timeline will
>              go something like this (Chaals will correct it if my
>         back/packet
>              calculations are awry):
> 
>              Mon 10th Jul: open CFC for CR.
>              Tue 25th Jul: publish CR (triggers AC review).
>              Mon 9th Oct: open CFC for PR.
>              Tue 24th Oct: publish PR.
>              Wed 22nd Nov: AC review ends.
>              Thu 7th Dec: publish Rec.
> 
>              Léonie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>              [1]
>         https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2016Nov/0014.html
>         <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2016Nov/0014.html>
>             
>         <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2016Nov/0014.html
>         <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2016Nov/0014.html>>
> 
>              --     @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk
>         <http://tink.uk> <http://tink.uk> Carpe diem
> 
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     @LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk <http://tink.uk> Carpe diem
> 
> 

-- 
@LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk Carpe diem

Received on Thursday, 6 July 2017 17:12:09 UTC