Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec ready for FPWD?

On 5/30/12 2:36 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
> What are people's thoughts on whether or not the Quota Management API 
> spec is ready for First Public Working Draft (FPWD)?

(Ooops, c&p error above: s/Quota Management/Webapp Manifest/)

> A "rule of thumb" for FPWD is that the ED's scope should cover most of 
> the expected functionality although the depth of some functionality 
> may be very shallow, and it is OK if the ED has some open bugs/issues.

In addition to the above, one of the side effects of the publication of 
a FPWD is that it starts the spec's first Call for (patent) Exclusions 
(see [CfE] for details). Consequently, the FPWD should contain enough 
information regarding its scope to facilitate a patent search.

I mention this because Adam (and others) raised concerns the ED "makes 
some implicit assumptions about the security model". I don't think that 
concern is necessarily a showstopper for the FPWD. However, such 
comments indicate to me the spec's scope isn't quite fleshed out yet, at 
least regarding security considerations. It would be useful for the ED 
to be more explicit about the concerns that have raised. For example, 
the ED could contain some type of Issue block and point to this thread.

I don't recall the group discussing the UCs and requirements the spec 
addresses. Perhaps it would also be useful to step back a bit and try to 
get agreement on some high level requirements before proceeding. 
(Marcos' requirements document for widgets could provide some useful 
info [Widget-Reqs].)

WDYT?

-AB

[CfE] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion
[Widget-Reqs] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 00:11:40 UTC