Re: FPWD for web intents, was Re: Face to face with DAP?

Agreed. I think we're ready to go. Something I'd really appreciate is
a critical editing pass from someone skilled in the arts of
spec-writing. I think there's a spec in all that text, but making it
pop out is something I'd like assistance with, if you have time or
nominations. :-)

Web-apps folks also sound eager to move to FPWD. What do we do next!


On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:19 AM, James Hawkins <jhawkins@chromium.org> wrote:
> I think we should consider these as separate issues (FPWD and finding a
> common home for WI/R*H) so we can continue moving forward with the active
> development of WI.  Eventually we'll solve the latter parenthetical, but
> that is a large undertaking.
>
> James
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> Where does this leave us with steps towards a first public working
>> draft?  What about Ian's suggestion for moving the existing
>> register*Handler() stuff to the same spec as intents?
>>
>> Ian said:
>>
>> > From a purely spec-editorial perspective, it seems to make more sense to
>> > have all of this in one spec, rather than split across multiple specs.
>> > If
>> > you would like, I'd be willing to spec this all in the HTML spec (which
>> > would especially make sense if we do add another element);
>> > alternatively,
>> > we should really consider moving the existing register*Handler() stuff
>> > to
>> > the same spec as the intent stuff.
>>
>> see
>> http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-April/035301.html
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
>
>

Received on Thursday, 17 May 2012 01:58:02 UTC