RE: Request to move app: URI to FPWD

> The point of a charter is to define the scope of deliverables so that participants can estimate the breadth of the patent commitment.

This feature was not defined within scope of the charter based on our understanding.  This is why I was asking for it to be called out in the charter. 

Note that the charter in its current form is not very well defined IMO in terms of what is in scope and what is not with respect to runtime security and execution.

" Execution Model
A description of the execution model and associated APIs for system applications, particularly how the execution model differs from the traditional browser-
based execution model. Example: Strawman proposal from Google.

Security Model
A description of the security model and associated APIs for system applications, particularly how the security model differs from the traditional browser-based security model. Examples and further background: "

The examples provided are not suitable for defining technical scope either.  

In order to move this forward, would it be possible to modify the charter from its current form to better describe the deliverables of the group?  If there is some commitment to this, we can withdraw our objection.

-Giri


-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Berjon [mailto:robin@w3.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 8:17 AM
To: Mandyam, Giridhar
Cc: Marcos Caceres; Mounir Lamouri; wonsuk11.lee@samsung.com; public-sysapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: Request to move app: URI to FPWD

On 18/04/2013 17:08 , Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:
> I don't see a problem in amending the charter to make this deliverable 
> explicit (this can also be done for app manifest).
> Please propose the appropriate charter modifications and we can 
> withdraw our objection.

As noted the app: URI scheme was part of a document that was in its entirety already deemed in scope for this group (and very justifiably so). The point of a charter is to define the scope of deliverables so that participants can estimate the breadth of the patent commitment. Its point is emphatically not to PHB-micromanage the publication of documents — that's the group's full prerogative. Splitting chartered deliverables into multiple documents, or conversely merging multiple chartered deliverables into a single document, is therefore a common operation.

There is therefore no need whatsoever for the charter to be modified. 
This objection has no grounding in W3C Process. I kindly suggest that you withdraw it with no further ado.

--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 15:42:47 UTC