- From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L <bs3131@att.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 21:21:38 +0000
- To: "'dsr@w3.org'" <dsr@w3.org>
- CC: "'Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com'" <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>, "'public-nfc@w3.org'" <public-nfc@w3.org>
I wasn't calling for specific wording. I was referencing the dialog about Web Intents being a reason that certain functional capabilities could be left out of scope in the charter. I think that determination is preliminary. So in general I am supporting what Virginie said and what I called for earlier in the thread. Bryan Sullivan | AT&T ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Raggett [mailto:dsr@w3.org] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 08:17 AM To: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L Cc: 'Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com' <Virginie.GALINDO@gemalto.com>; 'public-nfc@w3.org' <public-nfc@w3.org> Subject: Re: draft charter for a W3C NFC working group - gemalto comments Hi Bryan, On 11/05/12 15:45, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L wrote: > These type of technical dialogs and solutions should be addressed by > the members of a WG, so the charter should accommodate that. If Web > Intents is useful here that is an option but should not affect the > charter scope, as whether it is an adequate option may require more > discussion than should take place at this stage. Web intents doesn't appear in the current draft, so I am not sure what changes to the wording you are thinking of. -- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 21:22:53 UTC