- From: Matt Giuca <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:13:31 -0700
- To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2020 01:13:44 UTC
> It’s not typical for standards to reference external specs for removed features. Do you really want to formally object over lack of such a non-normative note? No, I don't. (Re-read my previous email: "I'm **not** going to raise a formal objection. I think we established earlier that we're not going to fight the removal of BIP from the spec.") > (FWIW I think such a note might be ok depending on how it’s worded. “Spec formerly included this feature, now it’s back to incubation.”) If we have to end up moving it to WICG, then I would appreciate a spec linking out non-normatively to that incubator repo, but as I said I'm not going to raise objections about it. While we're at it, I think it might be useful if we also linked non-normatively to other relevant incubations, such as [web-share-target](https://github.com/WICG/web-share-target/), just to say "heads up, here are some other Manifest features we're thinking about including". -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/manifest/pull/836#issuecomment-600935203
Received on Thursday, 19 March 2020 01:13:44 UTC