- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:47:33 -0800
- To: "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
Colleagues, Thank you all for submitting proposals for our phase one deliverables. Below is a list of proposals that I see in our GitHub repository. If I've missed one of your proposals, please let me know. == Contacts API == * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Contacts/Contacts.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/contacts_intel/Overview.html == Telephony API == * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Telephony/Telephony.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Telephony_Intel/Telephony.html One thing I noticed about the two Contacts proposals (as well as the two Telephony proposals) is that they largely overlap in technical content (and even in editorship). Would the editors of the Contacts proposals be willing to combine the two proposals into a single proposal? Similarly, would the editors of the Telephony proposal be willing to combine them into a single proposal? Once you've combined proposals, please send me a pull request that deletes one of the existing proposals and updates the other to the combined text. == Execution and Security Model == * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/SecurityModel/RequirementsForSecurityModel.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/RunTime-Security/Overview.html Our charter asks that we publish a FPWD of the Execution and Security Model this quarter. Mounir's proposal looks like a reasonable starting point for a FPWD, but there is a question in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2013Jan/0000.html as to how we should coordinate with the WebApps working group. John Lyle's comments in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2013Jan/0001.html are worth discussing, but they appear to be technical feedback that we can use to improve the draft after FPWD. It sounds like the next step here is for Wonsuk and me to talk with the WebApps chairs to make sure we're not going to step on their toes by issuing a call for consensus to publish Mounir's proposal as a FPWD. == Alarm API == * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/alarm/Overview.html Given that this proposal is relatively simple, I'm inclined to issue a call for consensus to advance this proposal to FPWD, but I welcome your thoughts the matter. == Messaging API == * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging/Messaging.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging/SMS.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging_Intel/Messaging.html * http://sysapps.github.com/sysapps/proposals/Messaging_webinos/Messaging.HTML We've received a number of proposals for Messaging, and there's been a bunch of discussion on the list. As mentioned by Jonas in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2012Dec/0009.html, it's not clear to me that we're all on the same page about use cases and requirements. Rather than move directly to a FPWD, I wonder we should first work on use cases and requirements for this deliverable. If that seems like a reasonable approach, Wonsuk and I will confer about how to structure that discussion. == Raw Sockets API == We haven't received any proposals for this deliverable yet, but Claes Nilsson wrote that he plans to submit a proposal relatively soon: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2013Jan/0004.html IMHO, we should consider proposals that missed the deadline, but we should preferentially focus our attention on proposals that did make the deadline. Thanks again, and I look forward to getting into the technical work! Adam
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2013 19:48:34 UTC