CfC: publish LCWD of Web Sockets; deadline May 18

This is a Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Web Sockets using the 
ED as the basis for the LC document <>.

Two non-substantive bugs are open [15209] and [15210]. There was some 
discussion about 15210 (see [15210-list]) but my conclusion is the 
overall consensus of the group is to publish the LC based on the ED as is.

This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's 
decision to request advancement" for this LCWD. Note the Process 
Document states the following regarding the significance/meaning of a LCWD:


Purpose: A Working Group's Last Call announcement is a signal that:

* the Working Group believes that it has satisfied its relevant 
technical requirements (e.g., of the charter or requirements document) 
in the Working Draft;

* the Working Group believes that it has satisfied significant 
dependencies with other groups;

* other groups SHOULD review the document to confirm that these 
dependencies have been satisfied. In general, a Last Call announcement 
is also a signal that the Working Group is planning to advance the 
technical report to later maturity levels.

If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please send them to by May 18 at the latest. Positive response is 
preferred and encouraged and silence will be considered as agreement 
with the proposal.

The proposed LC review period is 3 weeks.

-Thanks, AB


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[websockets] Moving Web Sockets back to LCWD; is 15210 a 
Resent-Date: 	Thu, 3 May 2012 22:42:24 +0000
Resent-From: 	<>
Date: 	Thu, 3 May 2012 15:41:46 -0700
From: 	ext Arthur Barstow <>
To: 	public-webapps <>

During WebApps' May 2 discussion about the Web Sockets API CR, four
Sockets API bugs were identified as high priority to fix: 16157, 16708,
16703 and 15210. Immediately after that discussion, Hixie checked in
fixes for 16157, 16708 and 16703and these changes will require the spec
going back to LC.

Since 15210 remains open, before I start a CfC for a new LC, I would
like some feedback on whether the new LC should be blocked until 15210
is fixed, or if we should move toward a new LC without the fix (and thus
consider 15210 for the next version of the spec). If you have any
comments, please send them by May 10.



Received on Friday, 11 May 2012 13:59:47 UTC