Re: How to standardize new Offline Web app features? [Was Re: Offline Web Applications status]

Hi Michael,

I am also not subscribed to public-html so I don't know if the HTMLWG 
discussed splitting Offline Web apps into a separate spec. One of 
reasons Storage, Server-sent Events, etc. were split out of HTML5 spec 
is to permit those specs moving through the W3C's Recommendation track 
independent of HTML5 (although that does not necessarily mean they will 
proceed "faster").

Perhaps subscribers to both lists (Mike Smith, Maciej, Hixie) could 
provide some guidance on which list to use for Offline Web applications 
(again, I'm OK with public-webapps) and which Bugzilla product/component 
to use to file feature requests for Offline Web apps. (I didn't find a 
specific "offline" component under the HTMLWG's product list so it 
appears the general HTML5 spec component is used.)

I agree am implementation of proposed features should help the (W3C's) 
standardization effort.

-AB

On Apr/1/2011 7:46 PM, ext Michael Nordman wrote:
> > How to standardize new Offline Web app features?
>
> Something that can help with 'standardizing' a new feature is an 
> implementation. Maybe I can help on that one by building the list of 
> features mentioned earlier in this thread [1] into chrome. The first 
> three bullets are fairly easy to come by but the fourth bullet will 
> take some time, but once four is done, five should just fall out.
>
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/1121.html
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com 
> <mailto:michaeln@google.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Art,
>
>     Please don't assume I know how the w3c works. I'm not subscribed
>     to the public-html list and honestly don't have  a good
>     understanding of which list is for what. I consider the feature
>     set provided in by the Application Cache to harmonize with other
>     topics discussed on the public-webapps list, so it seemed like the
>     natural place to discuss it. Actually Louis-Rémi started the
>     thread to which I responded.
>
>     Interesting question about moving the Offline Web Applications out
>     of HTML5 to a new home. I doesn't matter to me where this is
>     spec'd or discussed so much, what matters is that progress is made
>     as I think it's clear there is demand for "more" in this area. I
>     have not been party to any discussions about relocating the
>     Offline WebApps part of the HTML5 spec. Since you asked, I'm
>     guessing you think that could help with making faster progress?
>
>     -Michael
>
>     On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Arthur Barstow
>     <art.barstow@nokia.com <mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com>> wrote:
>
>         Michael, All,
>
>         On Mar/31/2011 6:18 PM, ext Michael Nordman wrote:
>
>             I have in mind several extensions to the ApplicationCache
>             that I think could address some of the additional
>             desirements from the web developement community. I'll post
>             them here because people seem to be more willing to have a
>             discussion on the topic here than over in whatwg.
>
>
>         From the process perspective, I think it is fine to discuss
>         this feature on public-webapps but since Offline Web
>         applications is defined in the HTML5 spec, I am curious why
>         you didn't use the public-html list.
>
>         BTW, has there been any discussion (e.g. in the WHATWG or
>         HTMLWG) about moving the Offline Web application  out of the
>         HTMLWG's HTML5 spec and into a separate spec? I'm wondering if
>         that could help facilitate the standardization of new features
>         like those you proposed in this thread [1].
>
>         -Art Barstow
>
>         [1]
>         http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/1121.html
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 2 April 2011 11:40:31 UTC