Re: Qualcomm position- Extensions

On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 10:55 AM Giridhar Mandyam <mandyam@qti.qualcomm.com>
wrote:

> Got it.
>
>
>
> > I could have misunderstood, but I think the issue there was that the W3C
> wants to see interoperability for normative parts of the spec.
>
>
>
> As per the background research described in the deck I sent out, this is a
> requirement for standards-track documents.  But W3C process allows for a WG
> to request a waiver from the Directorate (normally TBL, currently Ralph),
> which is also part of my recommendation.
>

I could certainly be wrong about whether the other extensions have a shot
at being normative. While it doesn't change Google's position, it certainly
seems that enough people want to try waiting a little longer.


Cheers

AGL