- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:13:23 -0400
- To: Mike Smith <mike@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Tab Atkins <jackalmage@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
All, What is the plan to address the following Web Storage bugs: 1. Bug-12111; spec for Storage object getItem(key) method does not match implementation behavior http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12111 2. Bug-12272; Improve section on DNS spoofing attacks to address user attacks http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12272 3. Bug-12090; It would be nice to have one Storage object that you could place wherever you want. http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12090 Which of these must be addressed before the WG considers the spec LC-ready? -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [webstorage] Moving Web Storage back to Last Call WD Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:19:51 +0900 From: ext Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> CC: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org> Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch>, 2011-02-14 10:13 +0000: > On Sat, 12 Feb 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: > > > > What high priority work must be done such that this spec is ready to be > > re-published as a new Last Call Working draft? > > Tab, do you know of anything that is blocking redoing an LC? > > (Personally I'm fine with it going to REC yesterday, so...) > > > Bugzilla shows no open bugs for this spec I just now raised a new one: spec for Storage object getItem(key) method does not match implementation behavior http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12111 -- Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2011 18:13:48 UTC