- From: chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex.ru>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:59:45 +0200
- To: tink@tink.uk, Andrew Betts <andrew.betts@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
+1, just for tracking. thanks Chaals On 11/07/17 18:55, Léonie Watson wrote: > > On 11/07/2017 17:03, Andrew Betts wrote: >> Hi Leonie, webapps, >> >> We're sorry for the extended delay TAG replying to this. The TAG's >> workmode <https://tag.w3.org/workmode/> [1] requests that people >> asking us for a review open an issue on our issue tracker in GitHub, >> and as a result we have gotten out of the habit of monitoring the >> mailing list for such requests. That said, it's our responsibility >> to keep up with messages directed to us on our MLs and we're sorry we >> missed this one. At the very least, we should have redirected you to >> our tracker in a prompt reply, so to be clear we accept complete >> responsibility for the delay here. > > Thanks Andrew. > >> >> First of all, I've opened an issue on the tracker >> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/184> [2]. I can >> confirm that we would indeed be interested in providing a review, but >> I'd like to check first that it's not moot at this point first. > Not at all, we'd still welcome the TAG's review. If you're able to get > the review done sooner rather than later it'd be appreciated though. > The editor has been putting in a lot of good work on this spec, so > getting it moved to Rec would be a good thing to do IMO. > >> >> Second, we're interested to know if you prefer to raise review >> requests on the ML (over using Github issues) and if so, why, so we >> can, if appropriate, consider changes to the work mode of the TAG. > > No, not at all. Github is preferred (old habits die hard is the only > reason it came via email). > > No need to reply to this email (in the interests of not making things > worse). > > In future we'll file requests on Github though. > > Léonie. >> >> [1] https://tag.w3.org/workmode/ >> [2] https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/184 >> >> Andrew >> >> On 20 June 2017 at 11:12, chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile >> <chaals@yandex.ru <mailto:chaals@yandex.ru>> wrote: >> >> (Speaking personally) >> >> 20.06.2017, 17:42, "Léonie Watson" <tink@tink.uk >> <mailto:tink@tink.uk>>: >> > On 03/05/2017 15:36, Léonie Watson wrote: >> >> Hello TAG, >> >> >> >> The WebPlat WG would welcome a TAG review of the Push API >> specification >> >> [1]. We'd like to transition to CR in the coming months, and >> this review >> >> will help us assess what remains to be done before then. >> >> I'm particularly concerned by issue 258 which it seems to me has >> security / privacy implications as a result of architectural >> choices: https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/258 >> <https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/258> >> >> A thoughtful review from the TAG would be appreciated... >> >> cheers >> >> >> If you could file your comments as Github issues [2], before >> 16th June >> >> 2017, that would be appreciated. >> > >> > A quick ping to make sure you've filed any issues and/or do not >> have any >> > comments? Thanks. >> > >> >> Any questions, you know where to find us - please just ask. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Léonie >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/push-api/ >> <https://www.w3.org/TR/push-api/> >> >> [2] https://github.com/w3c/push-api/ >> <https://github.com/w3c/push-api/> >> > >> > -- >> > @LeonieWatson @tink@w3c.social @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk >> <http://tink.uk> >> > Carpe diem >> >> -- >> Chaals is Charles McCathie Nevile >> find more at http://yandex.com >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 11 July 2017 17:00:29 UTC