Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] [wg/das] Devices and Sensors Working Group 2026 Charter (Issue #1187)

marcoscaceres left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#1187)

[As noted by @plehegar](https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/530#issuecomment-3955010546), the above doesn't address the TAGs concerns: We explicitly asked that you clarify things requested on a point by point basis **in the Charter** so the W3C Membership has visibility into what the WG is doing; Please also address the [recommendations](https://www.w3.org/2025/08/vibration2-council-report.html#recommendations) from the Vibration Council. 

If you'd like guidance on how to do that, we can set up a call. 

Also, having spoken with @simoneonofri, the [threat modeling guide](https://www.w3.org/TR/threat-modeling-guide/) is still in very early development. It's barely been road-tested, nor reviewed by the TAG, so merely citing it is not addressing the any concerns.

> the group has produced an [explainer for a higher-level battery signal](https://github.com/w3c/battery/blob/gh-pages/energy-saver-mode-explainer.md) and continues to discuss new API shapes and use cases for this feature.

If you'd like the TAG to review that, please file a separate review request. However, it doesn't address any concerns (just raises more of them).


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1187#issuecomment-3958500815
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1187/3958500815@github.com>