- From: Nikunj R. Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:16:58 -0800
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Nov 24, 2009, at 7:40 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > On Fri, 20 Nov 2009, Arthur Barstow wrote: >> >> Based on the responses for this call for comments, I see the next >> steps as: >> >> 1. Server-sent Events, Web Storage and Web Workers - ready for LCWD >> publication. Later today I will begin a CfC to publish LCWD of these >> three specs >> >> 2. Web Sockets API - the group should discuss Adrian's comments: >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009OctDec/0842.html >> >> 3. Web Database - there is sufficient interest to keep this spec on >> the >> Recommendation track. However, there is an open question about who >> will >> commit to drive this spec, in particular who will commit to being its >> Editor. Hixie - would you please explain your intent/position here? > > My intent with the Web SQL Database spec (or whatever I end up calling > it) is to continue to drive it to REC, but without defining the SQL > dialect in any more detail than the draft does now (as edited after > the > F2F). This suggests that we are unlikely to make any progress on the draft past this point. > I would not consider multiple implementations all using the same SQL > backend to be fully independent for the purposes of getting two > interoperable implementations for the purpose of exiting CR, and > thus I do > not expect this spec to ever get past that stage. I don't see any logic in this that would benefit this WG. > > <snip> > Nikunj http://o-micron.blogspot.com
Received on Wednesday, 25 November 2009 22:20:08 UTC