Re: Points of order on this WG

On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:03:48 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <>  

> 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.



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk       Try Opera:

Received on Saturday, 4 July 2009 14:44:06 UTC