Re: [admin] CfC completed - publish W3C Notes for TR shelved items to clarify status

Ian Jacobs pointed me to that old example.


On 11/4/2013 7:16 AM, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote:
> The CfC to publish W3C Notes for the shelved DAP specifications that had WD publications has completed.
>
> Given the support on the DAP call and no disagreement on the list we will publish the Notes using the method suggested by Wayne (see below, thanks again Wayne).
>
> The drafts for which we will publish updates will be:
>
> * Calendar API
> * Messaging API
> * System Information API
> * Pick Media Intent
> * Pick Contacts Intent
> * Web Intents Addendum - Local Services
>
> (Given the clear indication of status in the WebIntents Note publication I see no need for an update related to that Note).
>
> Anssi, are you able to prepare these Notes for publication? We can either try to publish this Thursday or after TPAC Thursday 21 November, for example.
> If you need my help let me know.   (We cannot publish the week of TPAC (11 Nov - 15 Nov) due to the publication moratorium [1] )
>
> (after this message we can remove public-web-intents from the cc list)
>
> thanks
>
> regards, Frederick
>
> Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
> Chair, W3C DAP Working Group
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2013OctDec/0036.html
>
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2013, at 7:50 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:
>
>> Wayne Carr suggested (on a DAP thread  ** ) another approach that seems appropriate for all the specifications listed in the CfC:
>>
>>> on Oct 15, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Wayne Carr <wayne.carr@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There apparently is a simple way to publish a /TR/shortname that indicates the draft is no longer worked on [1].  You can publish a 1/2 page Group Note that just says why the draft isn't being worked on anymore.  That has all the previous links to the TR and editor's draft.  So you don't have to go through rechecking the previous TR to republish that with the note because you aren't republishing the actual draft in what replaces the /TR/shorname/.  You're just publishing the note.
>>>
>>> Here's an example of where that was done before[1].
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-acss
>>>
>>> That seems a quick way to indicate in the short name that the draft is dead.
>>
>> I suggest we take this approach for the documents listed in the CfC and thank Wayne for sharing this great suggestion.
>>
>> This should also remove the need for the ugly disclaimer which Art and I expressed concern about ^^.
>>
>> Please consider the CfC amended to adopt this approach and comment accordingly if you have any concerns.
>>
>> regards, Frederick
>>
>> Frederick Hirsch
>> Nokia
>>
>> ** http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0121.html
>>
>> ^^ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2013Oct/0118.html
>>
>> On Oct 14, 2013, at 1:33 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote:
>>
>>> This is a Call for Consensus to publish W3C Notes for the shelved DAP Working Drafts (as well as shelved Web Intents Task Force WDs):
>>>
>>> The intent is to make clear in the published versions that these should not be referenced or used for implementation and to conclude work on these items. (That said, if the WG feels at some point that we wish to progress work in a Note to Recommendation we can still do so.)
>>>
>>> Each of the following will be published as a W3C Note including a prominent notice:
>>>
>>> [[
>>>
>>> The Device APIs Working Group is currently not pursuing the approach outlined in this draft, so it should be considered historical. Please treat this document with caution and do not reference it or use it as the basis for implementation. The domain covered by this document is still within the scope of the Working Group as defined in its Charter. The Working Group may pursue an alternative API design that is based on the current Web browser security model.
>>>
>>> ]]
>>>
>>> The links below are to the previous WD publications, each containing the shortname we would use for the Note publication.
>>>
>>> (1) Calendar API, http://www.w3.org/TR/calendar-api/
>>>
>>> (2) Messaging API, http://www.w3.org/TR/messaging-api/
>>>
>>> (Introduction example in editors draft seems to need some work)
>>>
>>> (3) System Information API, http://www.w3.org/TR/system-info-api/
>>>
>>> (4) Pick Media Intent, http://www.w3.org/TR/gallery/
>>>
>>> (5) Pick Contacts Intent, http://www.w3.org/TR/contacts-api/
>>>
>>> (6) Web Intents Addendum - Local Services, http://www.w3.org/TR/webintents-local-services/
>>>
>>> Although we've published "Web Intents" as a Note, we did not include the prominent notice so do you agree we should also publish this with the notice as well?
>>>
>>> (7) Web Intents,  http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-web-intents-20130523/
>>>
>>> (Personally I think text in the status section would suffice, but I believe the participants on the DAP call would prefer a notice similar to what we have in the shelved editors drafts, see http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/calendar/ for an example)
>>>
>>> Please respond to this CfC if you do not agree with publishing all of these as W3C Notes with the warning notice (including Web Intents) ; if you agree a positive response would be helpful. Silence will be construed as agreement.
>>>
>>> Please respond b 29 October 2013.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> regards, Frederick
>>>
>>> Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
>>> Chair XML Security WG
>>>
>>> For tracker, close DAP-ACTION-669
>>>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2013 17:04:10 UTC