Re: Levels of Importance or Priority

On 9/3/12 12:16 AM, ext Navarr Barnier wrote:
> MAX [Urgent/Time Critical]
> HIGH [Important/Realtime]
> DEFAULT
> LOW [General Updates]
> MIN ["Opportunistic"]
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 9:42 PM, Doug Turner <dougt@dougt.org> wrote:
>> The real problem with this suggest is that the importance will very
>> greatly and the user agents will have a terrible time figuring how to
>> expose this sanely.  I worry about a rush to the bottom (or rush to
>> everyone using the greatest importance).

I tend to agree with Doug (and can imagine some implementations that 
cannot make a visual distinction to the user a wide set of priorities).

Is the group documenting/gathering features for v.next (I couldn't find 
a related pointer in the latest ED)?

Anne's July 26 e-mail [1] indicated a publication of a Last Call Working 
Draft was imminent and that implies the group considers the spec 
"feature complete" already.

BTW, it appears that LC was not published. Is it blocked by I18N-related 
issues? What's the plan LC?

-Thanks, AB

[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-notification/2012Jul/0034.html

Received on Monday, 3 September 2012 12:02:34 UTC