- From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
- Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:35:50 +0100
- To: "ext Tobie Langel" <tobie@fb.com>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: Philippe Le Hégaret <plh@w3.org>, "Mike Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "Doug Schepers" <doug@w3.org>, "Paul Cotton" <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@us.ibm.com>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@gmail.com>, "Jonas Sicking" <sicking@mozilla.com>, "Adrian Bateman" <adrianba@microsoft.com>, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>, "Chris Wilson" <cwilso@google.com>, "Jake Archibald" <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:32:10 +0100, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
wrote:
> BTW, another option re the scope/charter questions is that the HTMLWG is
> simply using public-webapps list for all AppCache discussions and that
> HTMLWG retains (exclusive) decision making rights e.g. publication
> decisions. I can see some +/- on this approach, including it could
> conceivably eliminate the need for WebApps to recharter ;-).
Consistent with other decisions, I think unless we are chartered to talk
about appcache, the discussion cannot be held on the mailing list.
And that's just one of the drawbacks I can see.
cheers
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 15:36:30 UTC