Re: CfC: to publish First Public Working Draft of Uniform Messaging Policy spec; deadline January 19

I support this.

For the record: I have admittedly not been following the recent
discussions, but some of it has worried me a bit. I liked how UMP was
originally a subset of CORS, in that it gave some amount of
compatibility between the two models. In particular the ability for a
UMP client to talk to a CORS server seems like a win for both specs. I
also believe it makes switching between the two models slightly
easier, which again I think is a win for all involved parties.

If that is no longer the case, I hope that we'll end up back there.

In any case, whatever the state is I support the publication of this
FPWD. And please do keep technical discussions in the existing threads
(and new ones of course). I just wanted to raise some technical
concerns so that no one misunderstood what my support for the FPWD
meant.

/ Jonas

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote:
> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the First Public Working Draft
> (FPWD) of the Uniform Messaging Policy (UMP) spec, latest Editor's Draft at:
>
>  http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/
>
> This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's decision
> to request advancement".
>
> By publishing this FPWD, the group sends a signal to the community to begin
> reviewing the document. The FPWD reflects where the group is on this spec at
> the time of publication; it does not necessarily mean there is consensus on
> the spec's contents.
>
> As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged and
> silence will be assumed to be assent.
>
> The deadline for comments is January 19.
>
> -Art Barstow
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: ext Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>
>> Date: January 7, 2010 8:21:10 PM EST
>> To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
>> Subject: [UMP] A declarative version of "Uniform Messaging Policy"
>> Archived-At:
>> <http://www.w3.org/mid/5691356f1001071721k3ca16400qe5a2f4d6d966ca15@mail.gmail.com>
>>
>> I've updated the UMP spec to use a declarative style and moved the
>> algorithmic specification to a non-normative appendix. Hopefully this
>> organization will appeal to fans of either style. See:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/
>>
>> I'm hoping to move UMP forward to FPWD as soon as possible. Please let
>> me know if there is anything I need to do to expedite this process.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Tyler
>
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 00:04:26 UTC