Re: Adopting postMessage and MessageChannel from HTML5?

On Jan 14, 2010, at 6:16 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:

> Hi All,
> On Jan 12, 2010, at 10:42 AM, ext Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Jan 12, 2010, at 3:48 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> Was that Advisory Committee Review process followed for any of the
>> other specs we're working on that are not mentioned by name in the
>> charter? I listed a number of them in my earlier email (Selectors  
>> 2.0,
>> WebSimpleDB, DataCache, UMP).
> The Chairs and Team contacts discussed all of these and agreed they  
> were covered by WebApps' current charter.

It's still not clear to me why those items are covered and messaging  
is not, but if that's the ruling I'm willing to let it go.

>>> In this case, it seems like we should follow the precedence used
>>> with the other specs that were split from HTML5 and moved to
>>> WebApps, thus this new spec would need to be added to WebApps
>>> Charter before WebApps can publish it.
>>> Anyway, I'll ask the Team for advice on the way forward and we
>>> should move this administrative thread to WebApps Member list.
> The decision is that WebApps may now publish a Working Group _Note_  
> for postMessage and MessageChannel but we may not publish a Working  
> Draft until this item is formally added to our Charter.

Some information on the potential effects of this:

I believe this will lead to Web Apps WG's Web Workers draft having a  
normative dependency on a Working Group Note. Web Workers is in Last  
Call. I believe the end of the Last Call period is before we get  
rechartered. Thus, we will potentially end up asking for CR transition  
with a WG Note normative dependency. Is that going to be acceptable?


Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 16:23:40 UTC