[admin] short-names and 1-liners for our 7 new FPWDs

All - assuming the 7 CfCs I started on May 2 to publish new FPWDs passes, for each FPWD I will need to request a "short-name" as well as provided a "1-liner" description when the spec is published. The short-name is the last part of the URI used in /TR/; f.ex. "workers" is the short-name for W

Re: [admin] short-names and 1-liners for our 7 new FPWDs

On 5/9/12 12:55 PM, ext Ms2ger wrote: On 05/08/2012 09:10 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: 4. Web Components; <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webcomponents/raw-file/tip/explainer/index.html> short-name = webcomponents 1-liner = "Provides an overview of Web Components" Maybe it would be us

Reminder: RfC: LCWD of Server-sent Events; deadline May 17

Original Message Subject:RfC: LCWD of Server-sent Events; deadline May 17 Resent-Date:Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:30:54 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:30:25 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps This is a Request for Comments for

CfC: publish LCWD of Web Sockets; deadline May 18

bject: [websockets] Moving Web Sockets back to LCWD; is 15210 a showstopper? Resent-Date:Thu, 3 May 2012 22:42:24 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 15:41:46 -0700 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps During WebApps' May 2 discussion about the Web Sockets API CR, f

[admin] New wiki about Spec Editing

Since WebApps has quite a few new Editors, I created a new wiki doc about "Spec Editing" . Currently, the doc is mostly a skeleton but it does enumerate some expectations of Editors as well as provide links to various resources used to publish a spec

Re: WebApps May F2F Minutes

Thanks a lot Josh! Doug - please replace the date-space version or the May 1 and May 2 minutes with Josh's updated version: May 1: May 2:

Re: Shrinking existing libraries as a goal

FYI, a Script Library Community Group (Cc'ed) was formed some time ago and it may have some similar interest(s) (although their mail list archive indicates the CG isn't very active). Perhaps someone in that CG has some comments on Yehuda' email. -AB P

CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

During WebApps' May f2f meeting, the participants agreed [1] to publish a First Public Working Draft of the Fullscreen spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis (note that the document does not yet use a W3C publishing template):

Spec Bugs and Test Suites [Was: Re: Shrinking existing libraries as a goal]

On 5/17/12 7:03 PM, ext Julian Aubourg wrote: To me the biggest abomination of all is Just a reminder that WebApps' [PubStatus] page enumerates all of its specs and for each spec, there (or will be): a) a link to the spec's Bugzilla component; b) a link to the spec's Test Suite. Finally, fixi

Comments, Spec Bugs and Test Case are Always Welcome! [Was: Re: Shrinking existing libraries as a goal]

[ My previous response was accidentally sent before it should have been (delete it) ... ] On 5/17/12 7:03 PM, ext Julian Aubourg wrote: To me the biggest Comments on all of WebApps' specs are always welcome, regardless of where the spec is in the W3C's Recommendation process. I've been mea

Re: IndexedDB: Binary Keys

On 5/21/12 8:03 PM, ext Jonas Sicking wrote: On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Joran Greef wrote: IndexedDB supports binary values as per the structured clone algorithm as implemented in Chrome and Firefox. IndexedDB needs to support binary keys (ArrayBuffer, TypedArrays). Many popular KV sto

RfC: LCWD of WebSocket API; deadline June 14

This is a Request for Comments re the 24-May-2012 LCWD version of the WebSocket API: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-websockets-20120524/ The comment deadline is June 14 and all comments should be sent to the public-webapps@w3.org list. The Bugzilla component for the API is [Bugz]. I Cc'ed the

RfC: LCWD of Indexed Database; deadline June 21

This is a Request for Comments re the 24-May-2012 LCWD version of Indexed Database: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-IndexedDB-20120524/ The comment deadline is June 21 and all comments should be sent to the public-webapps@w3.org list. -Thanks, AB

CfC: publish WD of DOM 3 Events; deadline June 4

Travis would like to publish a new Working Draft of the DOM 3 Events spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using as the basis. Note this is Not a Last Call WD and the comment tracking document for the last LCWD

Is Quota Management API ready for First Public Working Draft?

Hi Kinuko, All - what are people's thoughts on whether or not the Quota Management API spec is ready for First Public Working Draft? 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, a

[admin] Mail List Policy, Usage, Etiquette, etc. & Top-posting

A recent manifest spec thread lead to a discussion about the group's "top-posting" policy which is a good segue to remind everyone we do have some expectations on the usage of the group's mail lists and I'll quote it here ... [[

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

On 5/17/12 10:00 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: During WebApps' May f2f meeting, the participants agreed [1] to publish a First Public Working Draft of the Fullscreen spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis (note that the document does no

[manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec ready for FPWD?

Hi All, Besides the thread below that Anant started a few weeks re the Webapp Manifest spec, Marcos also started a few threads on this spec ... What are people's thoughts on whether or not the Quota Management API spec is ready for First Public Working Draft (FPWD)? A "rule of thumb" for FP

Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec ready for FPWD?

On 5/31/12 5:23 PM, ext Adam Barth wrote: Is anyone besides Mozilla interested in implementing this specification? I don't recall anyone else committing to an implementation (although it could be a bit early). All - please speak up both on a) Adam's question; and b) the question in the Subj

Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec ready for FPWD?

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&#

CfC: publish FPWD of Quota Management API; deadline June 13

Having seen no negative responses to the "Is the Quota Management API spec ready for FPWD?" thread [1], this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of the Quota Management API using the following ED as the basis of the FPWD:

Re: [Process] Publishing use cases and requirements as official docs

On 6/6/12 1:55 PM, ext Tobie Langel wrote: Hi, I recently stumbled upon a number of use case and requirements docs (such as MediaStream Capture Scenarios[1] or HTML Speech XG[2]) that were published as officially looking W3C documents (for whatever that means, at least, it's not a page on a Wiki

Reminder: RfC: LCWD of WebSocket API; deadline June 14

Original Message Subject:RfC: LCWD of WebSocket API; deadline June 14 Resent-Date:Thu, 24 May 2012 17:21:24 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 13:20:50 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps CC: h...@ietf.org This is a Request

[DOM4] Mutation algorithm imposed order on document children

Elliott, All - please use the www-...@w3.org list for DOM4 discussions . (Elliott, since that spec is still in the draft phase, you should probably use the latest Editor's Draft instead of

Reminder: RfC: LCWD of Indexed Database; deadline June 21

Original Message Subject:RfC: LCWD of Indexed Database; deadline June 21 Resent-Date:Thu, 24 May 2012 17:21:06 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 13:20:20 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps This is a Request for Comments re the

Re: Browser Payments API proposal

On 6/16/12 8:16 PM, ext Alex MacCaw wrote: The blog article link has changed to: http://blog.alexmaccaw.com/preview/Pc1LYBw4xDT95OPWZGihod7z8WhrnfAdXMjQxMDg3MTc5NDIaXNjA1p Alex - perhaps this API will be of interest to the Web Payments Community Group

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote: Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit : Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD? We'll try to make one today during our weekly conf-call. Please note that we're going to review the bits of thi

Re: Updates to Selectors API

On 6/14/12 10:11 AM, ext Lachlan Hunt wrote: Hi, I have updated the specification for Selectors API Level 1, which is currently in CR. Most of it was editorial in nature, to bring it in line with Selectors API Level 2, except without adding any of the new features like findAll() or or matche

Re: Updates to Selectors API

On 6/18/12 8:34 AM, ext Lachlan Hunt wrote: On 2012-06-18 13:57, Arthur Barstow wrote: In the process, I also made a few minor editorial changes to v2 just to tidy it up. At this stage, we should be able to publish v1 as a revised CR, or possibly move it up to PR. I like the changes Lachlan

CfC: publish WD of Selectors API Level 2; deadline June 25

Lachlan would like to publish a new Working Draft of the Selectors API Level 2 spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so using the following Editor's Draft as the basis . Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new

CfC: publish a LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline June 25

Lachlan has made some changes to the Selectors API Level 1 spec (last published as a CR) and we consider the changes sufficient to require the spec be published as a Working Draft (see the [1] thread). As such, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a new LCWD of this spec using the following

Fwd: IndieUI Call For Proposals

The "Independent User Interface" WG (aka IndieUI) was started a few weeks ago [Charter] and they now have a CfP for the group's two specifications: IndieUI Events, and IndieUI User Context. Details below. -AB [Charter] http://www.w3.org/2012/05/indie-ui-charter Original Message -

Re: CfC: Publish FPWD of Web Intents spec; deadline June 12

On 5/29/12 2:45 PM, ext James Hawkins wrote: Dave Raggett (d...@w3.org) made a call [1] on April 10 to publish a first public working draft, and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis: I included public-webapps and public-device-apis on this CfC since

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

On 6/19/12 3:52 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote: Le 18/06/12 13:09, Arthur Barstow a écrit : On 5/30/12 10:38 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote: Le 30/05/12 14:43, Arthur Barstow a écrit : Chris, Daniel, Peter - when will the CSS WG make a decision on the FPWD? We'll try to make one today d

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

On 6/19/12 3:49 AM, ext Daniel Glazman wrote: Le 19/06/12 09:41, Anne van Kesteren a écrit : On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM, fantasai wrote: It looks like you missed #2. I think ::backdrop is clear enough. Not entirely sure what you would expect seeing there more than what it already says.

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Fullscreen spec; deadline May 24

On 6/21/12 5:16 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:48 PM, fantasai wrote: You could just work in the explanation I sent in http://www.w3.org/mid/4fc64100.3060...@inkedblade.net Added a note. The reason this is not very elaborated is that this really belongs in a CS

[websockets] Seeking comments on moving back to CR; deadline June 28

Hi All, I created a tracking document for the two comments and five bugs that were submitted against the 24 May LCWD of Web Sockets (or in the approximate time frame of that publication): . Below is my "take" on these bugs

CfC: publish new WD of File API; deadline July 3

Hi All - Arun is back to actively editing the File API spec and this is a Call for Consensus to publish a new WD of the spec. Please note that Arun will be committing some changes during this CfC and that the ED does not yet use the WD template: Agreem

RfC: LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline July 19

This is a Request for Comments for the June 28 Last Call Working Draft of Selectors API Level 1: The comment deadline is July 19 and all comments should be sent to the public-webapps@w3.org list with a Subject: prefix of " [selectors-api]"

[websockets] Seeking comments on moving back to CR; deadline July 9

eking comments on moving back to CR; deadline June 28 Resent-Date:Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:29:06 + Resent-From:<mailto:public-webapps@w3.org> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:28:31 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow <mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com> To: public-webapps <mailto:public-w

Re: [websockets] Seeking comments on moving back to CR; deadline June 28

On 6/21/12 4:53 PM, ext Julian Reschke wrote: On 2012-06-21 16:28, Arthur Barstow wrote: ... <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012AprJun/0880.html> - This is an editorial bug and is already captured in Bug 12510. Ideally, this bug would be fixed before the v1 CR bra

CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Web Sockets API; deadline July 18

ww.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-websockets-20120524/ Original Message Subject: [websockets] Seeking comments on moving back to CR; deadline June 28 Resent-Date:Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:29:06 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:28:31 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To:

RfC: Content Security Policy 1.0 Last Call; deadline Aug 24

WebApps has been asked to review the July 10 LCWD of WebAppSec's Content Security Policy 1.0 spec . Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback directly to the Web Perf WG. If you have comments, please send them to the followi

Re: CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Web Sockets API; deadline July 18

On 7/11/12 7:52 PM, ext Ian Hickson wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2012, Julian Reschke wrote: OK; the amount of work is ~45 minutes (and probably can be automated for future publication cycles). See attachments; an edited version of the current editor's draft, and the diffs. ... ..and the diff was re

Reminder: RfC: LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline July 19

Original Message Subject:RfC: LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline July 19 Resent-Date:Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:59:09 + Resent-From: Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 10:58:36 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps This is a Request for Comments

[Server-sent Events] Status of 26-April-2012 LC comments

Hi All, The comment deadline for the April 26 SSE LC [LC] ended May 17. Since the LC was published, I noted 2 comments, 1 bug report (see below) and 5 ED updates (see below). The comments are: 1. 17-Apr-2012; Odin Hørthe Omdal (Opera); http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012

Re: CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Web Sockets API; deadline July 18

On 7/12/12 8:06 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote: On 2012-07-12 13:47, Arthur Barstow wrote: I agree with Hixie that ideally the fix would apply to the original source rather than 1-off versions in dev.w3. However, if that isn't worked out, I will apply Julian's patch to the CR version

CfC: publish Widgets P&C as a "Proposed Edited Recommendation"; deadline August 8

Marcos would like to publish a "Proposed Edited Recommendation" [PER] of the Widget Packaging and XML Configuration spec [REC] to incorporate the spec's errata and this is a Call for Consensus to do so. The [Errata] has already been reflected in the [Proposed-PER] (see [Diff]) and it includes

[websockets] ArrayBuffer added back to the ED

Hi All, Earlier today, Hixie added ArrayBuffer back to the WebSocket API ED (see [r1.272]) as requested in bug [17263] which ATM is Resolved/WontFix. Since the CfC to move this spec to CR passed on July 18 (but the CR has not yet been published), I would appreciate it you would please Raise

Re: [websockets] ArrayBuffer added back to the ED

WebSocket API CR and first publish a new LC with Hixie's fix for this bug? In the absence of any additional feedback, I will start a new CfC for LC (and stop the request to publish a CR). -Thanks, AB On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi All, Earlier today,

CfC: publish LCWD of WebSocket API; deadline August 6

This is a Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of WebSocket API using the following document as the basis for the LC . Note that besides the ArrayBuffer patch ([r1.272] which fixes bug 17263 as discussed in [1]), to reduce

F2F meeting Oct 29-30 in Lyon France; registration deadline Oct 16

Hi All, As announced earlier, WebApps will have a f2f meeting October 29-30 as part of the W3C's annual Technical Plenary Week in Lyon France. WebApps' meeting page is . We will again preallocate some time slo

Re: [selectors-api] RfC: LCWD of Selectors API Level 1; deadline July 19

On 7/19/12 11:15 PM, ext Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: Sorry for my late comment. While I think it's fine to publish LCWD Selectors API as it is, it would be nice if it can address my comment in [1]. By "address", I mean either define the desired behavior or explicitly mark it as undefined (which I

Re: IndexedDB and RegEx search

On 7/31/12 2:17 PM, ext Michael Brooks wrote: I like IndexedDB and non-relational databases. One feature that is very useful is the ability to search by regular expression: http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries#AdvancedQueries-RegularExpressions By not having this feature, I ca

Re: CfC: publish Widgets P&C as a "Proposed Edited Recommendation"; deadline August 8

haals McCathieNevile wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:17:42 +0200, Marcos Caceres wrote: On Wednesday, 25 July 2012 at 19:02, Chaals McCathieNevile wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:26:44 +0200, Arthur Barstow mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com)> wrote: > Marcos would like to publish a "

[admin] using Bugzilla's "component tracking feature"? [Was: [webcomponents]-ish: Visibility of work in Bugzilla

On 8/16/12 1:29 PM, ext Dimitri Glazkov wrote: That's a great point. It's already tracking all of the Web Components work (it looks like I am by far the spammiest -- not the best of honors, but I'll take it). Perhaps we could just encourage people to listen to that? :DG< On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at

Re: RfC: LCWD of WebSocket API; deadline August 30

On 8/10/12 12:34 AM, ext Takeshi Yoshino wrote: No technical comments. A few editorial comments. > CLOSING (numeric value 2) > The connection is going through the closing handshake. The readyState can enter CLOSING also when close() is called before establishment. In that case, it's not going

Re: [admin] using Bugzilla's "component tracking feature"? [Was: [webcomponents]-ish: Visibility of work in Bugzilla

On 8/20/12 5:05 PM, ext Michael[tm] Smith wrote: Arthur Barstow , 2012-08-20 08:11 -0400: On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote: We have public-webapps-bugzilla[1] already, but I have no idea why we can't just turn on the component watching feature at the W3C Bug

CfC: publish Widgets P&C as a "Proposed Edited Recommendation"; deadline August 28

Marcos would like to publish a "Proposed Edited Recommendation" [PER] of the Widget Packaging and XML Configuration spec [REC] to incorporate the spec's errata and this is a Call for Consensus to do so. The [Errata] has already been reflected in the [Proposed-PER] (see [Diff]) and it includes

CfC: publish LCWD of DOM 3 Events; deadline August 31

[ cross-posting to www-dom and public-webapps -> please reply just to www-dom ] All - Travis has the D3E spec down to Zarro Bugs [1] and as such this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a LCWD of the spec . This CfC

CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of WebSocket API; deadline September 7

The comment period for the August 9 LCWD of The WebSocket API [LCWD] ended on August 30. During that time, two bugs were submitted against the LCWD ([18623] and [18509]). Both of these bugs requested non-normative changes and fixes for both of these bugs are included in the version of the spec

Re: Editor's draft created of DOM Parsing and Serialization Spec

On 8/29/12 7:55 PM, ext Travis Leithead wrote: Folks, following up on my action item from TPAC 2011 (yeah, I know…), the DOM Parsing and Serialization Editor’s Draft specification has been created! http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/innerhtml/raw-file/tip/index.html Thanks for creating this ED! BTW,

CfC: publish FPWD of DOM Parsing and Serialization; deadline Sept 11

This is a Call for Consensus to publish a First Public Working Draft of the DOM Parsing and Serialization spec using the following ED as the basis . This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's decision to request ad

Please don't SPAM our mail list [Was: Re: Social Networking and Elections]

On 9/5/12 11:16 AM, ext Adam Sobieski wrote: Web Applications Working Group, The subject matter of this mail list is the WG's specifications. Please use this list accordingly. If anyone wants to reply to Adam's e-mail, please use some other mail list (such as www-t...@w3.org). -Thanks, AB

Re: [EventSource] Feedback Comments

On 9/6/12 3:05 PM, ext Karl Dubost wrote: Hi, I was ready to send a comment about the spec using the Feedback Comments form http://dev.w3.org/html5/eventsource/ If you wish to make comments regarding this document in a manner that is tracked by the W3C, please submit them via using our public

Re: Call for Review of Content Security Policy 1.0

On 9/7/12 12:05 PM, ext Hill, Brad wrote: The Web Application Security Working Group at the W3C is planning to advance Content Security Policy 1.0 to Candidate Recommendation – a final set of features and syntax – and is seeking wide review of the document at this time. We would especially va

Reminder: Mail List Etiquette [Was: Re: localStorage]

On 9/11/12 9:03 PM, ext Sean McHugh wrote: I submitted a proposal yesterday. I don't want to spam you so this is the last time I will make this suggestion directly. This is the first email I have seen from you on this list. Please note we have a mail list usage and etiquette policy

[WebSockets] Call for Implementations

A new Candidate Recommendation of the WebSocket API was published on September 20 and that resulted in a Call for Implementations [CfI]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/CR-websockets-20120920/ The root of the test suite for this spec follows. Currently, the test suite consists of submissions from Mi

Re: [xbl] "status of this document" section could use work

On 9/20/12 8:24 PM, ext Samuel Bronson wrote: This does not make it clear why the specification was abandoned, or say where more recent efforts in this area are focused; I suggest changing it to something more like: Thanks for the suggestion. If/when we publish that document again, I will pro

[admin] Call for Editor for XHR REC track doc

Hi All, As you may know, Anne left Opera a few months ago and since the Invited Expert route didn't work out, we need an Editor(s) to move the XHR spec [XHR] towards Recommendation. If you are interested in this Editor position, please contact me offlist. -Thanks, AB [XHR]

[admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15

The upcoming TPAC meeting week (Oct 29-Nov2) provides an opportunity for joint WG meetings and lots of informal information sharing. As such, it can be useful to make new publications before TPAC. There is a publication "blackout period" around TPAC and Oct 23 is the last day to request public

[pointerlock] Is Pointer Lock feature complete i.e. LC ready? [Was: Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15]

On 9/26/12 11:46 AM, ext Vincent Scheib wrote: On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: * Pointer Lock - Vincent - what's the status of the spec and its implementation? Firefox 14 and Chrome 22 shipped Pointer Lock implementations to stable channel users recently. (Chec

[push-api] Moving Push API to FPWD [Was: Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15]

On 9/26/12 1:49 PM, ext SULLIVAN, BRYAN L wrote: We've previously called for any comments to the current Push API draft [1], and would like to promote it to FPWD before TPAC. We haven't received any substantive comments as far as I know, which tells me that it could be in good shape for public

CfC: publish LCWD of Pointer Lock; deadline Oct 4

This is a Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Pointer Lock using the following document as the basis for the LC . This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's decision to request advancement" for this LCWD. Not

[admin] Call for Editor for DOM4 REC track spec

Hi All, The current Editors of the DOM4 spec are not interested in moving that spec toward Recommendation (in the context of WebApps WG). Consequently, we need an Editor(s) to work on the DOM4 Recommendation track document. If you are interested in this Editor position and have relevant expe

[widgets] Packaged Web Apps (Widgets) - Packaging and XML Configuration (Second Edition) is a Proposed Edited Recommendation

Earlier today the W3C announced: [[ ... the advancement of "Packaged Web Apps (Widgets) - Packaging and XML Configuration (Second Edition)" to Proposed Edited Recommendation This second edition incorporates all known errata as of the publicati

Re: [admin] Call for Editor for XHR REC track doc

On 9/25/12 7:00 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: If you are interested in this Editor position, please contact me offlist. Thanks to those that expressed interest in helping move the XHR spec along the Recommendation track. We selected three co-Editors for this spec: Julian Aubourg (jQuery

CfC: publish WD of Shadow DOM; deadline Oct 10

Dimitri would like to publish a new Working Draft of Shadow DOM and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following document as the basis . Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a n

Re: [push-api] Moving Push API to FPWD [Was: Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15]

On 10/5/12 7:06 AM, ext Bryan Sullivan wrote: - more info on serverProtocols It still seems like the set of valid strings will need to be defined. Perhaps at this point, it would be sufficient if a related Issue Block was added. (I'll ask Mike to create a Bugzilla component for the spec.)

CfC: publish FPWD of Push API; deadline October 12

The Push API Editors would like to publish a First Public Working Draft of their spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following spec as the basis . This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's de

Re: CfC: publish LCWD of Pointer Lock; deadline Oct 4

On 9/27/12 8:26 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: This is a Call for Consensus to publish a LCWD of Pointer Lock using the following document as the basis for the LC <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerlock/raw-file/tip/index.html>. This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "re

[admin] Some points about WebApps' Work Mode [Was: Re: CfC: publish LCWD of Pointer Lock; deadline Oct 4]

On 10/5/12 1:21 PM, ext Vincent Scheib wrote: Done, May user agents apply additional restrictions on entering pointer lock? [1] created and added to status section of specification. Thanks Vincent. Some FYIs for All regarding the process-related points ... * Given WebApps' distributed and asy

[admin] Publish Early, Publish Often [Was: Re: publish WD of Shadow DOM; deadline Oct 10]

On 10/5/12 1:41 PM, ext Carr, Wayne wrote: People often don't know to look at the editor's draft and they wind up looking at docs the WG has gone beyond. So, we should publish regular WDs where the editor's draft has changed as often as possible. I agree WDs should be published if the ED has

Reminder: F2F meeting Oct 29-30 in Lyon France; registration deadline Oct 16

nt-Date:Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:47:57 + Resent-From: Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:47:28 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps Hi All, As announced earlier, WebApps will have a f2f meeting October 29-30 as part of the W3C's annual Technical Plenary Week <http:

[announce] WebPlatform Docs: community resource for Web developers and designers

Hi All, On October 8 the W3C announced the alpha release of a new WebPlatform Docs initiative . From the home wiki: [[ Web Platform Docs is a new community-driven site that aims to become a comprehensive and authorita

CfC: publish LCWD of Server-sent Events; deadline Oct 18

Ian has now closed the last substantive bugs for the Server-sent Events spec so this is a Call for Consensus to publish a new Last Call Working Draft of this spec using the following ED as the basis . Two non-substantive editorial bugs remain open ([16070]

Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15

On 10/9/12 4:13 PM, ext Arun Ranganathan wrote: On Sep 26, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: * File API - Arun can you get this spec ready for LC by October 15? Yes. ATM, File API has 8 open bugs [1]. Are you going to fix all of them by October 15 or will you propose some set of

Re: CfC: publish FPWD of Push API; deadline October 12

On 10/5/12 7:38 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: The Push API Editors would like to publish a First Public Working Draft of their spec and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following spec as the basis <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/push/raw-file/default/index.html>. This CfC sat

[admin] New public IRC server refuses passwords

[ bcc public-webevents ] FYI, the W3C's IRC server was upgraded recently. It was supposed to be 100% transparent to users but it turned out differently. FMI see . Original Message Subject:New public IRC server refuses password

Call for Editor: Progress Events REC track spec

Hi All, Since the Invited Expert route didn't work out for Anne, we need an Editor(s) to move the Progress Events spec - last published as a Candidate Recommendation [ProgEv] - towards Recommendation. If you are interested in this Editor position, please contact me offlist. Also, if anyone h

CfC: publish LCWD of File API; deadline October 22

d silence will be considered as agreement with the proposal. -Thanks, AB Original Message Subject: Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:29:17 -0700 From: ext Arun Ranganathan To: Arthur Barstow CC:

[widgets] XML Digital Signatures for Widgets REC Delayed until at least January 2013

Hi All- a couple of FYIs re the "XML Digital Signatures for Widgets" Proposed Recommendation [widgets-digsig]... * You may recall widgets-digsig has a normative dependency on "XML Signature Syntax and Processing Version 1.1" [xmldigsig-core1] andthe "Elliptic Curve PAG" was created because of

[widgets] Does anyone still care about Widget Updates?

26 Apr 2012 12:41:34 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps CC: The comment deadline for the Widget Updates LCWD ended April 19. No comments were submitted for that document so this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of the spec using the LC a

Re: CfC: publish WD - NOT LCWD of File API; deadline October 22

consider this CfC as hereby amended to "publish a new WD - and NOT a LCWD". -Thanks, AB On 10/16/12 9:29 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: All - this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Last Call Working Draft of the File API spec <http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/FileAPI/>. No

RfC: LCWD of Server-sent Events; deadline November 13

This is a Request for Comments for the October 23 Last Call Working Draft of WebApps' Server-sent Events spec: The comment deadline is November 13 and all comments should be sent to the public-webapps@w3.org list with a Subject: prefix

Draft Minutes: 30 October 2012

ll do it here ... tell HTML WG that WebApps wants to do it here, and themselves ... will we have a turf war? paulc:i don't know the answer, we'll find out on thursday chaals:message to HTML WG is "we want it here, if that's ok with you guys" paulc:chairs should take an ac

Re: ACTION-669: Work with PLH on an announcement seeking IRC fragments (Web Applications Working Group)

.) -Thanks, AB #exit <http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/#cr-exit> On 10/29/12 12:08 PM, ext Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: ACTION-669: Work with PLH on an announcement seeking IRC fragments (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/action

Re: FW: Draft Minutes: 29 October 2012

On 10/29/12 8:15 PM, ext Travis Leithead wrote: To clear up and potential confusion about IE's Shared Worker implementation status, I'd like to change this: Travis: we don't support shared workers in any form ... with the possible exception of automatic GC to: Travis: we don't support sh

WebApps' File: Writer & File: D&S specs and SysApps' File System and Media Storage specs

[ My apologies in advance for cross-posting but I'd like feedback from both the WebApps and SysApps communities ... ] Hi Eric, Adam, WonSuk, All, During WebApps' Oct 29 discussion about the File: Writer (#Writer) and File: Directories and System (#D&S) specs (#Mins), someone mentioned SysApps

Call for Editor: URL spec

Hi All, We need an Editor(s) to move WebApps' URL spec towards Recommendation. If you are interested in this Editor position, please contact me offlist. -Thanks, AB [URL]

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >