- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 07:27:28 -0500
- To: ext Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>, Jonas Sicking <sicking@mozilla.com>, Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 12/10/12 5:12 PM, ext Joshua Bell wrote: > Given the state of the open issues, I'm content to wait until an > editor has bandwidth. I believe there is consensus on the resolution > of the issues and implementations are already sufficiently > interoperable so that adoption is not being hindered by the state of > the spec, but should still be corrected in this version before moving > forward. Joshua, Jonas, Adrian, All, If we go ahead with LCWD #2 for v1, which [Bugs] do you consider showstoppers for LC #2? Does anyone object to a v1 plan of LC#2 as the next publication (after the showstopper bugs have been fixed)? (Of course we will have a CfC for any publication proposals so I'm just looking for immediate feedback). Joshua, Adrian - can you (or someone from your company) help with IDB editing (at a minimum to address the showstopper bugs)? -Thanks, AB [Bugs] <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=Indexed%20Database%20API&resolution=---&list_id=3759> > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com > <mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com>> wrote: > > It's been a month since we talked about the next publication > steps for the IDB spec (#Mins). Since then, I am not aware of any > work on the #LC-comments tracking. As such, here is a straw man > proposal to move v1 forward: ... > > * Forget about processing #LC-comments > > * Mark all open #Bugsfor v.next > > * Start a CfC to publish a new LC based on the latest #ED "as is". > (If Jonas commitsto making some important changes, that would be > fine too but I don't think we want to includeany "feature creep" > or API breaks.) > > Re v.Next, I recall Jonas said he was willing to continue to be an > Editor but I am not aware of anED being created. If/when a new ED > is created, we can work toward a FPWD. > > Comments? > > -Thanks, AB > > #Mins <http://www.w3.org/2012/10/29-webapps-minutes.html#item16> > #Bugs > <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=Indexed%20Database%20API&resolution=---&list_id=2509> > #ED <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html> > #LC-comments > <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/IndexedDB%20Disposition%20of%20Comments.html> > > > >
Received on Friday, 4 January 2013 12:27:54 UTC