- 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