- From: David Rogers <david.rogers@omtp.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:30:50 -0000
- To: <marcosc@opera.com>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: "public-webapps" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Marcos, Art, Please could you point us in the direction of the documentation from W3C on progressing to PR? Is there some kind of formal gate to progression? Thanks, David. -----Original Message----- From: public-webapps-request@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Marcos Caceres Sent: 03 February 2010 14:57 To: Arthur Barstow Cc: public-webapps Subject: Re: [widgets] P&C: comments submitted after 1-Dec-2009 CR#2 publication Hi Art, On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: > Marcos, All - below is a list of headers for comments submitted to > public-webapps re the P&C spec and test suite after CR#2 was published on > 1-Dec-2009. I think the list is complete but I haven't double-checked it. > > Will addressing any of the post-CR#2 comments prevent this spec from > advancing to Proposed Recommendation: > > http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#cfr IMO, there is nothing preventing this spec from progressing to PR from those emails. The emails have only resulted in clarifications to the spec and fixes in the test suite. However, I'd personally like to see two "commercial-grade" implementations (or whatever you would call them, products with 100,000+ users) pass 100% of the test suite before moving this to PR. I'd hate to see spec bugs showing up in the wild while in PR, when we could have caught them during the CR phase - or that QA processes from well-funded commercial entities discover issues during PR that where not caught by the smaller scale implementations we currently have (no offence to anyone that has implemented thus far, I'm just trying to assure the quality for the benefit of everyone). Anyway that's my position. If other implementers feel confident that the spec is solid enough to become a standard, then onwards we go :) > -Art Barstow > > > = From: marcosc@opera.com > Subject: [widgets] Null in P&C > Date: February 2, 2010 7:29:42 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B681AB6.2060101@opera.com> > > = From: arveb@opera.com > Subject: One <feature>, multiple resources > Date: January 29, 2010 7:45:18 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/op.u7aodsi2byn2jm@galactica> > > = From: marcosc@opera.com > Subject: [widgets] P&C typo in 9.1.9. Rule for Parsing a Non-negative > Integer > Date: January 19, 2010 7:06:21 AM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/b21a10671001190406p6d804eachb42b2261ed673da6@mail.gmail.com> > > = From: scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com > Subject: [widgets] Anyone working on SNIFF in Java? > Date: December 17, 2009 4:57:21 PM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/78001806-B3B5-4751-BBC9-C166B7EEB21C@gmail.com> > > = From: scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com > Subject: [widgets] test-suite: start file encoding > Date: December 17, 2009 12:21:42 PM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/7C6E8FCF-91AE-4A5D-97C2-7AA35F8CA90D@gmail.com> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] white space handling > Date: December 17, 2009 7:26:24 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B2A2370.60009@enst.fr> > > = From: eyal@isoc.org.il ; Eyal Sela > Subject: Widget packaging conformance > Date: December 16, 2009 7:18:37 AM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/013601ca7e49$e56f27e0$b04d77a0$@org.il> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] duplicated feature elements ? > Date: December 16, 2009 4:51:20 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B28AD98.9030009@enst.fr> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] feature: inconsistent behavior ? > Date: December 16, 2009 4:13:55 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B28A4D3.5060003@enst.fr> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] features: default value for required > Date: December 16, 2009 3:50:02 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B289F3A.1010504@enst.fr> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] test suite: br.wgt > Date: December 15, 2009 10:41:31 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B27AE2B.6030206@enst.fr> > > = From: marcosc@opera.com > Subject: Re: [widgets] test suite, the width/height attribute > Date: December 14, 2009 10:49:04 AM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/b21a10670912140749o10252cevaa8a25699a158662@mail.gmail.com> > > = From: amit.kasher@pnyxe.com > Subject: Widget specification - liquid height support > Date: December 10, 2009 9:54:15 AM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/4b210bab.1438560a.1fc4.ffffc2a7@mx.google.com> > > = From: cyril.concolato@enst.fr > Subject: [widgets] P&C simplifying some rules (editorial) > Date: December 9, 2009 7:50:44 AM EST > Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B1F9D24.3010807@enst.fr> > > = From: marcosc@opera.com > Subject: Re: [widgets] test-cases for icons: some possible errors > Date: December 9, 2009 6:34:30 PM EST > Archived-At: > <http://www.w3.org/mid/b21a10670912091534nf8c2cfbq875b5fa93445ad0b@mail.gmail.com> > > > > -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 15:31:26 UTC