W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: CfC: publish Widget Updates as a WG Note; deadline May 23

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:54:51 +0400
To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Message-ID: <op.wxfe1pp2y3oazb@dhcp-216-147-wifi.yandex.net>
On Fri, 17 May 2013 03:40:16 +0400, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>  
wrote:

> It appears there is no longer sufficient interest to move the Widget  
> Updates on the Recommendation track so this is a Call for Consensus to  
> publish this spec as a WG Note and thus formally stop work on it.

Go ahead.

cheers

> If you have any comments or concerns about this CfC, please send them to  
> public-webapps@w3.org by May 23 at the latest. Positive response is  
> preferred and encouraged and silence will be considered as agreement  
> with the proposal.
>
> -Thanks, AB
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	Re: [widgets] Does anyone still care about Widget Updates?
> Resent-Date: 	Tue, 14 May 2013 13:33:26 +0000
> Resent-From: 	<public-webapps@w3.org>
> Date: 	Tue, 14 May 2013 09:32:22 -0400
> From: 	ext Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
> To: 	public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
>
>
>
> Scott indicated [1] Wookie implemented Widget Updates and Chaals
> indicated [2] he would followup with Opera but I couldn't find a
> response from them in the list archive.
>
> Do we have two (complete?) implementations of the spec? Opera, Richard?
>
> It's not clear to me if we should drop this spec (i.e. publish as a WG
> Note) or if there are sufficient resource commitments to continue to
> advance it along the REC track.
>
> Marcos - what is the status of the test suite
> <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/test-suite/>? (The
> Implementation Report doesn't look good
> <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/imp-report/>.)
>
> -AB
>
> [1]
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0256.html>
> [2]
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0261.html>
>
>
> On 10/20/12 8:12 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> For various reasons, a Candidate Recommendation of Widget Updates was
>> never published, although the CfC to do so passed and the ED is
>> prepared as such [widget-updates].
>>
>> Since no one has raised this as an issue, I would like feedback on
>> what we should do with this spec. The main options are: 1) to stop
>> work (and publish a WG Note); 2) to move forward with the CR.
>>
>> I don'tthink it makes much sense to move the spec to CR if we do not
>> have  commitments for at least two independent implementations of the
>> CR. Therefore, Implementors should please speak up if they willcommit
>> to implementing this CR.
>>
>> -Thanks, AB
>>
>> [widget-updates] <http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/>
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject:     CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Widget Updates;
>> deadline May 2
>> Resent-Date:     Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:42:00 +0000
>> Resent-From:     <public-native-web-apps@w3.org>
>> Date:     Thu, 26 Apr 2012 12:41:34 -0400
>> From:     ext Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
>> To:     public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
>> CC:     <public-native-web-apps@w3.org>
>>
>>
>>
>> The comment deadline for the Widget Updates LCWD ended April 19. No
>> comments were submitted for that document so this is a Call for
>> Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the spec using the LC
>> as the basis <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-widgets-updates-20120322/>.
>>
>> The Exit Criteria for the CR will be the same as that used for the other
>> widget specs, namely that two or more implementations must pass each
>> test case.
>>
>> This CfC satisfies: a) the group's requirement to "record the group's
>> decision to request advancement" to CR; and b) "General Requirements for
>> Advancement on the Recommendation Track" as defined in the Process
>> Document:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs
>>
>> Positive response is preferred and encouraged and silence will be
>> considered as agreeing with the proposal. The deadline for comments is
>> May 2 and all comments should be sent to public-webapps at w3.org.
>>
>> -Thanks, AB
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
       chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2013 08:55:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:10 UTC