Re: [workers] Processing comments from 10-Mar-2011 LCWD
Hi Tab, All - can you Tab, or someone else, commit to processing the comments and bugs for the Workers LCWD? Given Hixie's bug list [1], perhaps we shouldn't wait for him. -Art [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/0385.html On Apr/28/2011 1:35 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: Hixie, All, April 21 was the comment deadline for the March 10 LCWD of the Web Workers spec [WW-LC]. Since that LC was published, I noted 2 set of comments and 2 new bugs: * Adrian Bateman; 9-Mar-2011 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/0877.html * Travis Leithead; 20-Apr-2011 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011AprJun/0269.html * Bug-12067; Jonas Sicking; 14-Feb-2011 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12067 * Bug-12340; Olli Pettay; 19-Mar-2011 http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12340 Hixie - what normative changes have been made in the ED [WW-ED] (since the LC was published) that would affect an implementation based on the March 10 LC? The Process Document defines the requirements for processing LC comments [LC] and the WG's main requirement is to respond to all comments. It appears there is no agreed conclusion to the two comments nor to Bug-12067 and there were no responses to Bug-12340. -ArtB [WW-LC] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-workers-20110310/ [WW-ED] http://dev.w3.org/html5/workers/ [LC]http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#last-call
Re: [workers] Processing comments from 10-Mar-2011 LCWD
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hixie - what normative changes have been made in the ED [WW-ED] (since the LC was published) that would affect an implementation based on the March 10 LC? No idea, I don't track changes at the level of individual W3C specs for these technologies. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'