- From: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 09:35:45 +0100
- To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Hi Folks,
thanks a lot for the productive discussion during yesterday's call.
It is nice to actually start closing issues and progress towards our
goal of a stable final draft.
What I realized (since time is short) is that we should constrain
ourselves on a minimal spec that is good enough.
What this means:
- We should focus on helping EU compliance
- We should improve implementability
- We should try to abstain from fundamental redesigns and
substantial new features.
What does this mean for the group?
I suggest we focus only on substantial concerns backed by evidence. This
means that we should focus on issues that:
- Substantially simplify or improve implementation.
Evidence could be implementation experiences/reports.
(e.g. Mike stating that it is useful for a site to receive a call-back
is in this category).
- Substantially help EU enterprises to manage opt-in for compliance
Evidence could be enterprise/site feedback or regulator requirements.
(e.g. Rob saying that the Javascript exception API is
essential for managing opt-in and should be kept is in
this category).
- Are required by W3C to reach recommendation state
As indicated, the goal is to deliver a "good enough" TPE in time and
ideally simple enough to be widely implemented. Ideally, I would hope
that no other changes are required at this point.
Does everyone agree with this procedure? Any feeback or objections?
Regards,
matthias
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 08:36:17 UTC