On Nov/6/2010 6:04 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Ian, All - during WebApps' November 1 gathering, participants expressed
in an interest in publishing a First Public Working Draft of Web
Messaging [1] and this is a CfC to do so:
http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/
This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's
decision to request advancement".
I'd rather not add another document to the list of documents for which I
have to maintain separate W3C headers and footers at this time (especially
given that I'm behind on taking the other drafts I'm editing to LC). The
text in the spec really belongs in the HTML spec anyway and is already
published by the WHATWG in the HTML spec there, and is already getting
ample review and maintenance there, so I don't think it's especially
pressing to publish it as a separate doc on the TR/ page. (The contents of
the doc have already gone through FPWD at the W3C, so there's not even a
patent policy reason to do it.)
I think we all understand the workload issue here and I probably should
have mentioned this CfC to you before sending it to public-webapps (so
sorry about that!).
When WebApps re-chartered last Spring, Web Messaging was added to our
Charter thus there is an expectation we will publish it.
Assuming we get consensus to publish the FPWD, one way to move forward
with the publication would be for me [and Mike Smith if he's available]
to copy the latest ED and only make required changes to the text to pass
Pub Rules e.g. update the Status of the Doc section. Would that be OK?
I'm also a bit concerned that every time we publish anything on the TR/
page, we end up littering the Web with obsolete drafts (since the specs
are maintained much faster than we publish them). I'd really rather just
move away from publishing drafts on the TR/ page at all, if we could
update the patent policy accordingly. I frequently get questions in
private e-mails from implementors who are looking at obsolete drafts on
the TR/ page about issues that have long been solved in the up to date
drafts on dev.w3.org or at the WHATWG.
If there wasn't such high overhead to publishing on the TR/ page, an
alternative would be to publish a new draft there frequently. In fact, the
best thing on the short term might be to publish a new REC-level draft
there every week or every month or some such (probably the best interval
would be whatever the patent policy's exclusion window is), since that
would actually make the patent policy work again. (Currently the patent
policy at the W3C is almost as useless as at the IETF since when we follow
the process properly, we almost never get to REC.)
I think these are good discussion topics and I would prefer to not let
them block this CfC.
Perhaps some other Public mail list (i.e. not public-webapps) would be a
better place for related discussions although I don't have a firm
recommendation (www-talk?).
Mike, Team - can you provide some advice here on a Public list for
discussions related to process and publication issues?
-Art Barstow
