- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:43:14 +0200
- To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: "Nikunj R. Mehta" <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>, "Doug Schepers" <schepers@w3.org>, "public-webapps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Jeff Mischkinsky" <JEFF.MISCHKINSKY@oracle.com>
On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:03:48 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>> We are "potentially interested" - i.e. we want to see how the spec
>> comes out first. Given that this is in the scope of existing
>> deliverables, and given taht Oracle are providing the resources to edit
>> it, I see no reason to simply stand in their way.
> I think a B-Tree style storage API would clearly be in scope of existing
> deliverables. However, it's not clear to me that Oracles's other
> proposals (programmable http cache, request interception) are. As I
> understand it, those technologies don't really relate to storage, or
> even networking as such, but are meant to serve a role similar to
> HTML5's Application Cache feature. Also, Nikunj's request was to add
> these things to the charter, from which I infered the charter doesn't
> already obviously cover them.
As I noted in my earlier message to Nikunj, as far as we (chairs, staff
contacts and domain lead) can see the features *do* relate to storage, and
are in scope of the charter as is.
So it's OK, you don't need to worry about the charter changing.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Saturday, 4 July 2009 14:44:06 UTC