- From: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 16:05:47 -0400
- To: Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>, Brad Hill <hillbrad@gmail.com>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
On 09/15/2015 03:26 PM, Daniel Veditz wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com > <mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com>> wrote: > > there's nothing wrong with reffing WHATWG specs. It will not delay > or hamper > > publication or Rec-track advancement, despite the > occasional misinformed > > complaint from someone not aware of the > > policies. > > > When the complaint comes from the office of the Director we have to > assume it's going to hamper us whether or not they are misinformed. To be clear here: the point made was that the Web Application Security group never asked for a review from the Web Applications working group prior to asking for transition to CR. As a consequence, the WebApps group did not get an opportunity to review the Upgrade Insecure Resources specification [1], including the reference related to Web Workers. As a reminder, there is an expectation that the specification has received wide review prior to the publication of a Candidate Recommendation. Philippe [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/upgrade-insecure-requests/
Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2015 20:05:51 UTC