- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:24:07 -0400
- To: ext Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Mike Smith <mike@w3.org>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Sep 27, 2009, at 7:33 PM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > ECMA TC39 (the group responsible for ECMAScript) has expressed a > strong interest in having a list for joint discussion with the W3C, > and particularly the Web Apps WG. And they are especially interested > in review of Web IDL. I suggest we set up <public-scripting@w3.org> > (name suggested by Mark Miller) as a list managed by the Web Apps WG > for both purposes - discussion of Web IDL, and other scripting-related > coordination issues. I think this would be better than the massive > cross-posting we've experienced over the past few days. > > Does this sound like a good idea to everyone? The only concern I have is the potential for an input from someone who has not agreed to the W3C's Patent Policy (PP) to be included in one of our specs. In practice, the risk for this scenario for the Web IDL spec appears to be relatively low. However, at least one of the messages in one of these related threads implied there may be an impedance mismatch between ECMA's patent policy and the W3C's PP. I think we should get some input from the W3C Team here but it appears the benefits of this proposed list i.e. increased communication between ECMA and W3C, outweigh the IP risks so you get a tentative Yes from me. FWIW, I think Doug's earlier proposal to name this list "public-idl" was good but I am mostly indifferent as to the name and could certainly live with public-scripting. Mike, Doug - please pursue creating the list. -Regards, Art Barstow > If so, how quickly can > we get it done? > > Regards, > Maciej > >
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 00:25:03 UTC