On 5/30/12 2:36 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote:
What are people's thoughts on whether or not the Quota Management API spec is ready for First Public Working Draft (FPWD)?
(Ooops, c&p error above: s/Quota Management/Webapp Manifest/)
A "rule of thumb" for FPWD is that the ED's scope should cover most of the expected functionality although the depth of some functionality may be very shallow, and it is OK if the ED has some open bugs/issues.
In addition to the above, one of the side effects of the publication of a FPWD is that it starts the spec's first Call for (patent) Exclusions (see [CfE] for details). Consequently, the FPWD should contain enough information regarding its scope to facilitate a patent search.
I mention this because Adam (and others) raised concerns the ED "makes some implicit assumptions about the security model". I don't think that concern is necessarily a showstopper for the FPWD. However, such comments indicate to me the spec's scope isn't quite fleshed out yet, at least regarding security considerations. It would be useful for the ED to be more explicit about the concerns that have raised. For example, the ED could contain some type of Issue block and point to this thread.
I don't recall the group discussing the UCs and requirements the spec addresses. Perhaps it would also be useful to step back a bit and try to get agreement on some high level requirements before proceeding. (Marcos' requirements document for widgets could provide some useful info [Widget-Reqs].)
WDYT? -AB [CfE] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Exclusion [Widget-Reqs] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/
