Re: New CfC Re: [Selectors API] Call for Consensus - approve John Resig's tests

Hi Lachy - this CfC has ended and my records show there were no  
objections. Given this, we now have a Go to prepare a Candidate  
Recommendation for publication.

I presume the actions, that follow from the set of questions listed  
below, can be addressed during the Candidate period. Do you agree?

Regarding the Candidate's Status of the Document (SotD) that needs to  
define the spec's exit criteria, I think the text Cam used for the  
Element Traversal CR is a reasonable pattern to follow:

  http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-ElementTraversal-20080813/

After the SotD has been updated, we can start the process of  
scheduling the Director's call.

-Regards, Art Barstow


On Apr 14, 2009, at 9:30 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>
>> So we have a new call for consensus on each of four questions:
>>
>> Should we make Erik's proposed changes[1] to the test suite?
>> Should we add Hixie's first test[2]?
>> Should we add Hixie's second test[3]?
>> Do we need tests as described by Lachy[4]
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/mid/op.uqxrarbjgqiacl@gnorps.linkoping.osa
>> [2] http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/selectors/001.html
>> [3] http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/dom/selectors/002.html
>> [4] http://www.w3.org/mid/49B91637.3050004@lachy.id.au
>>
>> Please reply before 1 May - silence will be assent, positive early
>> answers are preferred (especially if you think there is something
>> we should be discussing still).
>
> I defer to Lachy's expertise on this question.
>
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                ) 
> \._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _ 
> \  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'-- 
> (,_..'`-.;.'
>

Received on Saturday, 2 May 2009 12:09:19 UTC