- From: Suresh Chitturi <schitturi@rim.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:33:18 +0000
- To: "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
Hi all, Sorry for coming in a bit late......to the discussion. It does make sense for the group to put more emphasis on the execution and security model. Once we have this APIs itself should be relatively straightforward exercise. We do also agree on the phasing approach where simple (and non-controversial) APIs are targeted. Probably the ones that can offer the most number of use cases e.g. contacts, messaging, and calendar, etc. would be a good start. Regards, Suresh From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:22:49 -0700 Message-ID: <CAJE5ia9HLfKPoDN7FSaLqE1CVgTjgXrkNBf-M=S_BbtLUq-+RQ@mail.gmail.com> To: public-sysapps@w3.org Hi public-sysapps, Before we start on technical work, we should make sure we'll all happy with the charter. One concern I have with the draft charter <http://www.w3.org/2012/05/sysapps-wg-charter.html> is that the list of deliverables is too long. I'm worried that this group wouldn't have sufficient resources and momentum to write 28 high-quality specifications right out of the gate. By way of comparison, the WebApps charter has 16 deliverables and has significantly more resources and momentum than we do. Concretely, I think we should pick a handful of deliverables to work on in the near term and then add more deliverables as we build up momentum and success. For example, here's a set of deliverables that might make sense for the first round: * Security Model * Execution Model * Raw Socket API * DNS Resolution API * USB API It's valuable to work on the security and execution model earlier rather than later because these documents provide the context for the balance of the APIs. Raw sockets, DNS resolution, and USB are good examples of system-level APIs that should be relatively non-controversial, letting us demonstrate some early success and build up momentum. To reduce re-chartering overhead, we might want to pick another half dozen deliverables to put in the charter for "phase 2." We wouldn't necessarily need to finish all the phase 1 deliverables before moving on to phase 2, but separating the two will help us focus at the beginning. I'm open to suggestions about which deliverables we should tackle first. My main desire is to ensure that the working group starts out focused so that it has some early success. Adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 20:34:57 UTC