- From: mark a. foltz <mfoltz@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 09:54:37 -0700
- To: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Cc: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, "public-secondscreen@w3.org" <public-secondscreen@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CALgg+HEeiYu_qP0eL0-Fqr1hPGuRiRY9+O_PFSjtgav22gJhzA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 2:11 AM, Kostiainen, Anssi < anssi.kostiainen@intel.com> wrote: > Hi MarkFo, Francois, > > > On 08 Jun 2015, at 11:24, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote: > > [...] > > >> As part of the process of exposing the API, the Chrome Web platform team > >> usually wants to see a W3C TAG review of the specification requested or > >> in progress. > > > > Side process note in case people are wondering: asking the TAG to review > our spec is not required per process as such. > > [...] > > Francois - I think the trigger for this TAG review comes from the > "Intent-to-Ship" process of Blink, see [1]. > > Mark - correct? > Yes that's correct. > The W3C Process itself does not require a TAG review, although conducting > such a review is recommended as Francois explained. I guess we should > expect these Blink initiated TAG reviews to happen earlier than those > (optionally) triggered by the W3C Process at wide review since there's > tendency to ship things early to the developer channel. > Yes, part of the goal is to solicit feedback from the wider developer community and improve the implementation based on real world usage. Since this is a relatively major feature with dependencies on several browser components, the sooner we can get this feedback, the better. > > I agree that the list of tasks proposed by Francois would make the spec > easier to digest for someone not actively following the work (e.g. a TAG > member). However, given the spec is still relatively fresh, this TAG review > would be more about asking for TAG input and thus open questions should be > highlighted in the spec to set the expectations right. > > I agree a good procedural milestone to reach before requesting the TAG > review would be to publish a new snapshot of the spec in the "TR space". > So is the plan to finish the items outlined by Francois, publish a report in the TR space and then request review? Just trying to gauge the scope of work remaining for the editor here :) m. > > Thanks, > > -Anssi (WG chair) > > [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2015Apr/0019.html
Received on Monday, 8 June 2015 16:55:24 UTC