Re: Publishing an update of File API spec
Le lundi 06 juin 2011 à 08:55 -0400, Arthur Barstow a écrit : The last publication of the File API spec [ED] was last October so it would be good to publish a new Working Draft in w3.org/TR/. Since Tracker shows 0 bugs for the spec [Tracker] and the ED does not appear to identify any open issues, does the spec meet the Last Call Working Draft requirements (as, indicated in previous CfCs for LCWD such as [CfC-LCWD])? Note that the Web IDL fragments in that document are not valid: http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org% 2F2006%2Fwebapi%2FFileAPI%2Finput=output=html I would fix them myself, but last time I did it, that created troubles for the editor; I think the fixes are likely the same as the ones that were reverted back then: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/FileAPI/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.55;r2=1.57;f=h Dom, I apologize for rolling back your changes! I did this inadvertently (accursed CVS; silly me). I'll revert back to your fixes. -- A*
Re: Publishing an update of File API spec
[ + PLH ] Thanks for the update Arun. I just chatted with PLH in #webapps [1] and he will followup on the URI list about the registration process question you asked below. He and I agree with you that the completion of the scheme registration does not need to block LC. All open bugs should be closed before a CfC for LC is started. Currently, I only know of the two bugs that Adrian filed: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/products/19 Given this thread has served as a general heads-up re publishing an LC, I don't think we need a pre-LC comment period. -AB [1] http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/webapps/20110621 On Jun/21/2011 12:54 PM, ext Arun Ranganathan wrote: Hi Arun, Jonas, All, The last publication of the File API spec [ED] was last October so it would be good to publish a new Working Draft in w3.org/TR/. Since Tracker shows 0 bugs for the spec [Tracker] and the ED does not appear to identify any open issues, does the spec meet the Last Call Working Draft requirements (as, indicated in previous CfCs for LCWD such as [CfC-LCWD])? (Apologies for the tardiness of this response -- I only had intermittent access to this email account for the past few weeks). I'm ok with publishing a LCWD after I address comments received on this listserv. Right now, most of the spec issues have occurred in the listserv, without use of [Tracker], but I think it useful to start using [Tracker] as workflow here. If not, what is the schedule and plan to get this spec LC ready? In case people missed it, Arun started a discussion about the blob URI scheme on the URI mail list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2011May/.html The URI listserv gave me some feedback which I intend to take into account (mainly, clarifying spec. changes, an explanation of why other schemes weren't chosen first including urn:uuid, and then a reinitation of the discussion), but I'm not certain what the correct course of action after I make the changes are. I'm not sure that this scheme needs to be an IETF RFC, for example, but that's an open question. I'm also not certain that this question needs to block LCWD status. Course of action might be: 1. Fix spec. nits in ED based on feedback on listservs -- URI, public-webapps, and WHATWG. 2. Initiate LCWD based on ED. I definitely hope to finish 1. by June 27. Can we go straight to the LCWD process after that? -- A*
Publishing an update of File API spec
Hi Arun, Jonas, All, The last publication of the File API spec [ED] was last October so it would be good to publish a new Working Draft in w3.org/TR/. Since Tracker shows 0 bugs for the spec [Tracker] and the ED does not appear to identify any open issues, does the spec meet the Last Call Working Draft requirements (as, indicated in previous CfCs for LCWD such as [CfC-LCWD])? If not, what is the schedule and plan to get this spec LC ready? In case people missed it, Arun started a discussion about the blob URI scheme on the URI mail list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2011May/.html -Thanks, AB [ED] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/ [Tracker] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/products/19 [CfC-LCWD] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/0546.html
Re: Publishing an update of File API spec
Le lundi 06 juin 2011 à 08:55 -0400, Arthur Barstow a écrit : The last publication of the File API spec [ED] was last October so it would be good to publish a new Working Draft in w3.org/TR/. Since Tracker shows 0 bugs for the spec [Tracker] and the ED does not appear to identify any open issues, does the spec meet the Last Call Working Draft requirements (as, indicated in previous CfCs for LCWD such as [CfC-LCWD])? Note that the Web IDL fragments in that document are not valid: http://www.w3.org/2009/07/webidl-check?doc=http%3A%2F%2Fdev.w3.org% 2F2006%2Fwebapi%2FFileAPI%2Finput=output=html I would fix them myself, but last time I did it, that created troubles for the editor; I think the fixes are likely the same as the ones that were reverted back then: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/FileAPI/Overview.html.diff?r1=1.55;r2=1.57;f=h Dom
