Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Autoplay Detection API (#356)

Hi,

In addition to Hadley's comments, we've discussed this in a number of
telcons and at our spring F2F in Reykjavik.

First off, we're very sorry that it's taken so long to get back to you
on this review—we are in the process of trying to refine our processes
to get quicker at working through our backlog. 

We're also sorry that our design review issue template was somewhat
unsuited to cases like these, where the folks raising the issue have
been unable to come to consensus on the technical question at hand. It
was hard for us to follow this, and our template didn't guide you to
link to the issue (WICG/autoplay#7) that captures the various proposals
on the table. We have since made a number of changes to our template to
better handle such cases. (See 7e446fa, df507f6, 9237bd6, 68a1436, and
5e02e7c.)

Since this escalation request was received, the venue of the spec in
question has changed, and the venue change brings with it several
relevant process changes. This spec is now a chartered deliverable of
the [Media WG](https://www.w3.org/media-wg/), which operates under the
[W3C Process](https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/). It's the role
of chairs of that WG
[to help find consensus](https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#Consensus)
on this issue among the various WG participants. The Process document
also defines how the chairs should
[manage dissent](https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#managing-dissent).

Given the above, we're *remanding* this matter to the Media WG chairs
to take up. (cc @jernoble @mounirlamouri) We hope that the venue shift
to a group which operates under the W3C Process will help them, and the
community who have contributed to this issue, to come to agreement.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/356#issuecomment-495246562