- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:33:49 +0200
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Message-ID: <4FFDD51D.3050508@gmx.de>
On 2012-07-11 20:25, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2012-07-11 15:44, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 2012-07-11 15:11, Arthur Barstow wrote: >>> Yesterday Hixie closed several of the Web Sockets bugs mentioned in the >>> e-mail below and he updated others. I think this now provides a basis to >>> determine if we have consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation. As >>> such, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation >>> of Web Sockets. >>> >>> I propose the CR be based on the May 24 LC [1] plus include: >>> >>> 1. The editorial patch for 17224 [2] >>> >>> 2. The patch [3] to remove the TreatNonCallableAsNull qualifier for some >>> attributes. If anyone considers this change as substantive, please speak >>> up. Cameron - what's your opinion on this? >>> >>> Additionally: >>> >>> * 12510 - as Hixie indicated in the bug, if anyone is willing to create >>> a patch, please contact Hixie privately and please let me know of your >>> intent >>> ... >> >> I'll re-state that the current spec is under defined, and should not be >> published. >> >> As far as I can tell, the W3C team will have to tune some parts of the >> spec anyway, so why not also insert the missing links? >> >> (If the answer to that is: "too much work" then why do you consider that >> it's not a problem for the *audience* of the spec?) >> ... > > OK; the amount of work is ~45 minutes (and probably can be automated for > future publication cycles). > > See attachments; an edited version of the current editor's draft, and > the diffs. > ... ..and the diff was reversed; new version attached.
Attachments
- text/plain attachment: wsdiffs
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2012 19:34:36 UTC