Re: Call for Editor: URL spec

On 11/5/12 7:29 AM, ext Julian Reschke wrote: On 2012-11-05 12:46, Arthur Barstow wrote: 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] <http://dvcs.w3.or

Re: Call for Editor: URL spec

On 11/5/12 5:47 PM, ext Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: In the meantime, W3C is copying Anne's work in several specs, to It seems like W3C groups copying WHATWG's work has been ongoing for several years (so I think this is "old news", especially since, AFAIU, it is permissiable, perhaps even encouraged

Giving Credit Where Credit is Due [Was: Re: Call for Editor: URL spec]

On 11/6/12 3:46 AM, ext Ian Hickson wrote: the W3C does not generally give credit where credit is due. This issue has been bothering me for a while, so thanks for raising it. I agree proper attribution is a problem that needs to be addressed in the WG's versions of these specs (URL, DOM4, e

W3C document license [Was: Re: Call for Editor: URL spec]

On 11/6/12 3:23 AM, ext Ms2ger wrote: On 11/06/2012 08:02 AM, Adam Barth wrote: Does the WebApps Working Group plan do either of these things? A) Put in technical effort to improve the specification Unlikely. My expectation is that public-webapps will continue to be one venue for comments

Mail List Etiquette [Was: Re: Two years on and still no sensible web storage solutions exist]

Todd - your e-mail fails the "respectful manner" requirement of the group's e-mail policy (#Mail-List-Etiqutte). Please restrict the content of your e-mails to respectful technical comments. If you continue to fail to abide with this policy, your posting rights to this list will be removed.

CfC: publish Candidate Recommendation of Server-Sent Events; deadline November 21

The comment period for the October 23 LCWD of Server-Event Events ended yesterday. Since there were no comments submitted nor new bugs files, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Candidate Recommendation of this spec using #Draft-CR as the basis. This CfC satisfies: a) the group's requir

CfC: Selectors API Level 1 Test Suite; deadline November 23

The RfR for the Selectors API Level 1 test suite passed WebApps' testing group's review (see below), and according to the agreed #Approvalprocess, this now means a group wide review should be done. As such, this is a CfC for this test suite:

Re: Call for Consensus: CORS to Candidate Recommendation

On 11/15/12 5:31 PM, ext Hill, Brad wrote: I have placed a draft for review at: http://www.w3.org/2011/webappsec/cors-draft/ And this is a Call for Consensus among the WebAppSec and WebApps WGs to take this particular text (with necessary additions to the Status of this Document section if a

[admin] Publication Rules [Was Re: Call for Consensus: CORS to Candidate Recommendation]

The W3C's process documents (e.g. #PubRules) define the policies for publications and this issue will be addressed if/when the CR is actually published. WebApps is simply a user of the publication policy. If you want to discuss W3C processes such as PubRules, please use some other list - and

[admin] Publishing specs before EoY; CfC start deadline is December 2

Hi Editors, All, If we want to publish a WD or LCWDin #TR before the EoY, given the upcoming publishing blackout dates, the schedule and deadlines are: * December 2 - deadline to start a (1-week) CfC * December 9 - CfC end date * December 11 - deadline for publication request * December

[fyi] Minutes from Technical Plenary meeting at TPAC 2012

On 11/20/12 10:15 AM, ext Coralie Mercier wrote: > Minutes from TPAC 2012 [1] are now available: Plenary day (Public minutes) > http://www.w3.org/2012/10/31-tpac-minutes > > Please let us know if any corrections are necessary. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2012/10/TPAC/

CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

TheXHR Editors would like to publish a new WD of XHR and this is a Call for Consensus to do so using the following ED (not yet using the WD template) as the basis . Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new W

[admin] XHR ED Boilerplate

[ Sorry for the delayed response, I was choking on some turkey ... ] Here's what I did for the URL spec re the boilerplate to help address the "attribution issue" re Anne and WHATWG: [[ This Version: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/url/raw-file/

CfC: publish WD of Screen Orientation; deadline November 30

Mounir prepared a new WD for The Screen Orientation API and this is a Call for Consensus to publish that WD. Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new WD; and b) does not necessarily in

CfC: publish WD of DOM; deadline December 2

This is Call for Consensus to publish a Working Draft of the DOM spec using #ED as the basis. Please note Lachlan will continue to edit the ED during this CfC period. Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new WD; and b) does not necessarily indicate support of the

Re: CfC: publish WD of DOM; deadline December 2

On 11/25/12 10:19 AM, ext Ms2ger wrote: Same objections as to the XHR WD. Are you talking about ? The DOM ED includes the following in the boilerplate: [[ Living Standard: http://dom.spec.whatwg.org/ ]] What (else)

Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

On 11/26/12 1:38 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: I suggest we put the following wordings for Anne's work and WHATWG to be credited. If we make consensus, let me use this content for publishing the WD. Please put your proposed text in a version of the spec we can review and send us the URL of that

[admin] Consistent Boilerplate and Status sections for EDs [Was: Re: CfC: publish WD of DOM; deadline December 2]

y this working group also give credit appropriately? Adam On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: This is Call for Consensus to publish a Working Draft of the DOM spec using #ED as the basis. Please note Lachlan will continue to edit the ED during this CfC period. Agreement to

Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

On 11/26/12 8:44 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 9:46 PM On 11/26/12 1:38 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: I suggest we put the following wordings for Anne's work and WHATWG to be credited. If we make consensus, l

Re: CfC: publish WD of DOM; deadline December 2

will submit for publication. -Thanks, AB On 11/25/12 8:49 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: This is Call for Consensus to publish a Working Draft of the DOM spec using #ED as the basis. Please note Lachlan will continue to edit the ED during this CfC period. Agreement to this proposal: a

Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

On 11/27/12 12:21 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 3:05 AM I think the next step is for the XHR Editors to create a TR version using the WD template so that everyone can see exactly what is being proposed for

[IndexedDB] Straw man proposal for moving spec along TR track

It's been a month since we talked about the next publication steps for the IDB spec (#Mins). Since then, I am not aware of any work on the #LC-comments tracking. As such, here is a straw man proposal to move v1 forward: ... * Forget about processing #LC-comments * Mark all open #Bugsfor v.n

Re: FileSystem compromise spec

On 11/15/12 7:39 PM, ext Eric U wrote: As discussed at TPAC, there's little support for the current FileSystem API, but some support for a new API, and I promised to put forth a compromise proposal. In order to do that, I'd like to hear 1) what kinds of changes would make it more popular; 2) who

Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

On 12/1/12 3:34 PM, ext Ms2ger wrote: I object to this publication because of this change: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/rev/2341e31323a4 For a couple of years now, if a spec proposed for publication in TR includes a normative reference that hahas published as a TR, PLH has insisted the referenc

[admin] Off-Topic Discussion Policy

Hi All, We consolidated the various statements about not using WebApps' mail lists for non-technical and off-topic discussions and put them in a new section of the group's WorkMode wiki: Off-Topic Discussion Policy

Call for Review: Web IDL Testing document

To: Web Applications Working Group To: ACTION-670: Start a Call for Review for Web IDL test plan on public-script-coord (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/670 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2012-11-05 If you do not want to be notified on new a

RfC: LCWD of "Ambient Light Events"; deadline 26 January 2012

On 12/13/12 6:32 PM, Hirsch Frederick (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote: The Device API Working Group [1] has published a Last Call working draft of the "Ambient Light Events" specification today, 13 December 2012 [2] and requests review comments from your groups (Web Applications WG, System Applicatio

Re: [IndexedDB] Straw man proposal for moving spec along TR track

ttps://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=Indexed%20Database%20API&resolution=---&list_id=3759> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:02 AM, Arthur Barstow <mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com>> wrote: It's been a month since we talked about the n

Re: pointerLock vendor prefixes, shims and usability

Hi Vincent, Seeing this discussion, and noting two open [Bugz], I was wondering about the plan to get this spec to a feature complete status (and hence ready for Last Call Working Draft). Would you please provide a short status/plan for Pointer Lock spec vis-à-vis LCWD? -Thanks, AB [Bugz]

Re: [IndexedDB] Straw man proposal for moving spec along TR track

On 1/4/13 4:35 PM, ext Israel Hilerio wrote: We don't see the need to go back to LC. Most of the feedback was editorial. The other feedback we received, seems to have been agreed on by the iplementers & WG but not documented in the spec. We believe that addressing the bugs till the end of J

RfR: Progress Events Test Cases; deadline January 28

This is a WG-wide Request for Review [RfR] for all of the tests Ms2ger and Samsung submitted for the Progress Events CR [CR]: Jungkee noted in the e-mai

Re: RfR: Progress Events Test Cases; deadline January 28

On 1/19/13 10:20 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: I've pushed the php file in but cannot find it at mirror. Can anyone help? Did you do a `hg push`? It appears not .

Re: RfR: Progress Events Test Cases; deadline January 28

On 1/20/13 12:12 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: 2013. 1. 20. 오전 12:39에 "Arthur Barstow" <mailto:art.bars...@nokia.com>> 님이 작성: > > On 1/19/13 10:20 AM, ext Jungkee Song wrote: >> >> I've pushed the php file in <http://dvcs.w3.org/webapps/ProgressEven

Re: Proposal: moving tests to GitHub

On 1/22/13 5:53 AM, ext Odin Hørthe Omdal wrote: We just had a small discussion on webapps-testsuite [1] about the possibility of moving the webapps tests. I was wrongly under the impression that we had discussed this before (hey, confusion is not a crime ;) ). Now that HTML has done the move

Tracking test suite status in PubStatus

[ Sorry for the cross-posting but some of WebApps' "Test Facilitators" are not subscribed to public-webapps-testsuite (as they should be) ... ] As you may know, Dominique maintains a "Standards for Web Applications on Mobile" document [Doc] that enumerates various specs that are relevant in a

CfC: publish FPWD of HTML Templates; deadline January 31

Rafael and the other Editors of the HTML Templates spec would like to publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of "HTML Templates" and this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so, using the following ED as the basis:

RfC: LCWD of Touch Events v1; comment deadline February 14

On January 24 the Web Events WG published a LCWD of Touch Events v1 and they requested WebApps review this LC: The comment deadline is February 14 and all comments should be sent to the public-webeve...@w3.org list. Individual WG member

CfC: publish FPWD of Streams API; deadline February 2

Feras would like to publish a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of "Streams API" and this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to do so, using the following ED as the basis: This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group

[admin] Some tips on using Mercurial and dvcs.w3.org

[ Bcc: public-{webapps,webevents,pointer-events,webapps-testsuite} ] If you use hg @ W3C, please see the info below from Alexandre. On 1/29/13 2:18 PM, ext Alexandre Bertails wrote: Hi, I wanted to share some tips about the use of Mercurial and dvcs.w3.org. It's based on very common issues tha

Re: Proposal: moving tests to GitHub

On 1/24/13 1:22 PM, ext Odin Hørthe Omdal wrote: Arthur Barstow wrote: Before we start a CfC to change WebApps' agreed testing process [Testing], please make a clear proposal regarding the submission process, approval process, roles, etc. as is defined in [Testing] and its references

Re: Allow ... centralized dialog up front

On 2/1/13 6:30 AM, ext Charles McCathie Nevile wrote: Yep. There was some security work done a few years ago specifically looking at the sort of things that users understood, which recommended that for security it is helpful to have consistent presentation across browser UI. Florian - FYI, I

Re: Proposal: moving tests to GitHub

On 2/1/13 2:04 AM, ext Tobie Langel wrote: On 1/31/13 9:13 AM, "Arthur Barstow" wrote: As I said during one of the testing breakouts in Lyon, ultimately I suspect the saying "beggars can't be choosy" will trump. However, AFAIK, currently, only one of WebApps' th

Re: Proposal: moving tests to GitHub

On 1/31/13 3:18 PM, ext Rebecca Hauck wrote: Yes I submitted a batch of tests from TestTWF some time after the Paris event. OK, thanks for this clarification (I just noticed your submissions for IDB and DOMEvents). Sorry Odin for having missed those! Since I'm not in the webapps working gro

[admin] Call for Agenda topics for April 25-26 f2f meeting

Hi All, We created an agenda page for WebApps' April 25-26 f2f meeting, hosted by eBay in San Jose CA US [Agenda]. The proposed meeting format is similar to our previous f2f meetings - a mix of preassigned time slots for some specific topics use an `unconference` style meeting to determine t

Re: [admin] Call for Agenda topics for April 25-26 f2f meeting

[Agenda] <http://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/April2013Meeting> ;-) On 2/7/13 10:02 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi All, We created an agenda page for WebApps' April 25-26 f2f meeting, hosted by eBay in San Jose CA US [Agenda]. The proposed meeting format is similar to our previous f

Fwd: IndexedDB, what were the issues? How do we stop it from happening again?

FYI, Marcos started a thread about IDB and API design on the www-tag list. If you have any replies, please send them to www-...@w3.org Original Message Subject: IndexedDB, what were the issues? How do we stop it

[admin] Editors: check the URL scheme of your stylesheets

Editors - below is some additional information about a side-effect of the recent hg administration change, the essence summarized by Robin in: [[ dvcs.w3 [now] enforces HTTPS. If you're pointing to non-HTTP resources, so

Re: [editing] Is this the right list to discuss editing?

WebApps' last discussion about `group scope` and the HTML Editing spec was September 2011 [1]. At that time, WebApps agreed the Editing CG may use public-webapps since WebApps' charter then permitted WebApps to directly take on APIs that were removed from the HTML5 spec. Robin volunteered to h

Re: indexeddb and object store events

On 2/17/13 10:34 AM, ext Miko Nieminen wrote: So far I haven't got other feedback than this is fairly good idea and probably should be included in the official API, but is it stillpossible to get this kind of changes included in the API or am I too late with this request? If it is possible to h

Selectors API Level 1 is a W3C Recommendation

Congratulations to Lachlan and Anne on the publication of a Recommendation for Selectors API Level 1 . Great job guys! -ArtB

CfC: publish Proposed Recommendation of Web Storage; deadline March 6

We now have an Implementation Report [ImplReprt] for the Web Storage CR [CR] that indicates we have meet the exit criteria using the tests the group approved last year [TS-Approve]. As such, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Web Storage using [CR] as the basis

[admin] Registration for 25-26 April 2013 f2f meeting open; deadline April 5

The registration page for WebApps' April 25-26 f2f meeting in San Jose CA US is now open: Registration is required and registration ends on April 5. The agenda and logistics page is:

[admin] Towards XHR "The Attorney's Edition"

Last year we agreed to stop work on the "baseline" XHR spec because no one was willing to work on that version of the spec. Since then, the new XHR Editors agreed to work on a baseline version as well as to continue to work on the `bleeding edge` version. One goal of the baseline version is to

Web Storage's Normative References and PR / REC

Yves, Philippe, WebApps agreed via [CfC] to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Web Storage [CR] (implementation report is [ImplReport]). The CR has three normative W3C references that are not yet Recommendations: DOMCore WD, HTML5 CR and WebIDL CR. As such, we need you to clarify the implica

Re: Web Storage's Normative References and PR / REC

On 3/7/13 8:52 AM, ext Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 07:28 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote: Yves, Philippe, WebApps agreed via [CfC] to publish a Proposed Recommendation of Web Storage [CR] (implementation report is [ImplReport]). The CR has three normative W3C references that

[admin] Yves Lafon replaces Doug Schepers as Team Contact

Hi All, We just wanted to inform you that Yves Lafon (yla...@w3.org) is WebApps' new Team Contact. Doug - thanks for your previous work in WebApps and good luck in your new endeavors, especially webplatform.org. Yves - welcome to the group. For those that don't know Yves, he has been on th

Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?

[ Apology for top-posting and continuing the cross-posting ] Hi Brad, Thanks, yes earlier security review and feedback would be good. My preference is to use public-webapps (solely) for all discussions related to Web Components (WC). Re discussing security and WC f2f, I added a joint meeting

RfR: Web Workers Test Cases; deadline March 28

This is a WG-wide Request for Review [RfR] for the tests Microsoft and Opera submitted for the Web Workers CR [CR]: Simon (Web Workers' `Test Facilitator`) proposed

Re: security model of Web Components, etc. - joint work with WebAppSec?

On 3/14/13 8:16 PM, ext Charles McCathie Nevile wrote: On Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:15:14 +0100, Dimitri Glazkov wrote: On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Hill, Brad wrote: Is there time available on the April F2F agenda for discussion of this? If not in WebApps, would relevant WG members be will

CfC: move WebApps' test suites to Github; deadline March 22

As you probably know, the HTMLWG recently moved its test suite to GitHub (GH). Tobie, Robin, Odin, Ms2ger and others propose WebApps do the same and this is a Call for Consensus to do so. Odin defined the new testing process for GH in [Proposal] and this will replace most, if not all, of the t

Re: Update of the IME API spec working draft [call for comments]

On 3/19/13 5:40 AM, ext Takayoshi Kochi (河内 隆仁) wrote: Hi all, It's been a while since the last update for the IME API spec, but we restarted the work on this. I (Takayoshi Kochi) have taken over this authorship from the previous author (Hironori Bono) for updating the spec. If you are inter

CfC: publish WD of Clipboard API and events; deadline March 26

Hallvord has made a number of changes since the last publication of Clipboard API and events (last published in Feb 2012). As such, this is a Call for Consensus to publish a new WD of this spec using the ED as the basis: Agreement to this

Re: CfC: publish WD of Clipboard API and events; deadline March 26

On 3/19/13 8:05 PM, ext Gary Kacmarcik (Кошмарчик) wrote: Formatting comment: There are hard-coded section numbers in the doc and respec auto-numbers the first tag inside tags. The result of this is that most of the sections in this spec have 2 (different!) section numbers. It seems like the

CfC: publish WD of Input Editor Method (IME) API; deadline March 28

This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish a new WD of Input Editor Method (IME) API, using the following ED as the basis: Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new WD; and b) does not necessarily in

Reminder: [admin] Registration for 25-26 April 2013 f2f meeting open; deadline April 5

mote participants. -Thanks, ArtB Original Message Subject: [admin] Registration for 25-26 April 2013 f2f meeting open; deadline April 5 Resent-Date:Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:26:47 + Resent-From: Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:26:15 -0500 From: ext Arthur Barstow To:

What is your plan for the Fullscreen spec of WebApps and CSSWG?

Hi Tantek, Anne, It appears the Fullscreen spec of WebApps and CSS WG [1] hasn't changed since it was published last July. What is your plan for that spec vis-à-vis these two WGs (it's a joint deliverable)? -Thanks, ArtB [1]

RfC: 2nd LCWD of HTML Media Capture; deadline 19 April

The DAPWG asked WebApps to submit comments on LC#2 of "HTML Media Capture": Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback. If anyone in WebApps wants to propose an official WG response, please do so ASAP, in rep

Re: Reminder: Please register for Face to face by Friday

On 4/3/13 6:14 PM, ext Chris Wilson wrote: Paypal is in the same building complex with eBay (the address is the same, although I think the building number is different). Yes, thanks Chris. As the meeting date gets closer, Chaals or I will clarify the logistics (e.g. building number). (As I u

Re: Reviewing test submissions

On 4/4/13 10:23 AM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: after having moved the test suite to the GitHub repository, we've been busy cleaning things up. Can the mirroring to be more frequent than every 10 minutes? Or, is there a way to directly run a test s

RfC: LCWD of API for Media Resources 1.0; deadline June 3

The Media Annotations WG decided to return its "API for Media Resources 1.0" spec to LCWD and they have explicitly asked WebApps to review the new LC: Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback. If anyone in

[admin] Editors and Test Facilitators: please update your PubStatus data before April 25

Editors, Test Facilitators, During next week's f2f meeting [Agenda], we will once again go through [PubStatus] (aka the group's `dashboard`) to verify the data and to help us all (not just WG members) understand the status, plans, issues, etc. regarding all of our Specs and Test Suites. If y

RfC: API portion of JSON-LD 1.0 Algorithms and API LCWD; deadline May 10

Manu, on behalf of the RDF WG, requests WebApps "review the API portion of the JSON-LD 1.0 Algorithms and API LCWD specification" [LC]. I presume this means Section 11 (Manu, if this isn't correct, please

Re: DOM core changes wrt XML document properties

On 4/17/13 11:53 AM, ext Anne van Kesteren wrote: On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Henry S. Thompson wrote: Is there some survey of usage that helped inform your choice of properties to drop? Are there particular minutes of telcons or f2f meetings where this issue was discussed that you can p

Re: Collecting real world use cases (Was: Fixing appcache: a proposal to get us started)

On 4/18/13 12:19 PM, ext Paul Bakaus wrote: Do you have a list collected somewhere? Hi Paul, FYI, you might be able to scrape some UCs from the related workshop papers . Virginie's paper includes a few (security-related) UCs

[admin] Testing and GitHub login names

Test Facilitators, Editors, All, If you intend to continue to participate in WebApps' testing effort or you intend to begin to participate, please send your GitHub login name to Robin (ro...@w3.org) so he can make sure you have appropriate access to WebApps' test directories. -Thanks, AB

Re: [admin] Testing and GitHub login names

On 4/22/13 2:29 PM, ext Robin Berjon wrote: On 19/04/2013 06:15 , Arthur Barstow wrote: Test Facilitators, Editors, All, If you intend to continue to participate in WebApps' testing effort or you intend to begin to participate, please send your GitHub login name to Robin (ro...@w3.org)

Re: [admin] Testing and GitHub login names

Robin: The only thing that we ask is that pull requests not be merged by whoever made the request. Art: If a test facilitator submits tests (i.e. makes a PR) and everyone that reviews them says they are OK, it seems like the facilitator should be able to do the merge. Robin: Of course.

Draft minutes: 26 April 2013 f2f meeting

/www.w3.org/2013/04/26-webapps-minutes.html#action01] Created ACTION-692 - Announce the WG will meet during TPAC 2013 in November [on Arthur Barstow - due 2013-05-03]. ScribeNick: darobin chaals:that was painless ... the chartering stuff ... what do we need to add or remove ... we have a spe

CfC: publish Java bindings for WebIDL as a WG Note; deadline May 4

for WebIDL to WG Note (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/677 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/users/7672#settings

CfC: publish FPWD of UI Events; deadline May 4

ACTION-682: Start a CfC for FPWD of UI Events (and make sure it has a Bugzilla component) (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/682 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update

CfC: publish FPWD of Custom Elements; deadline May 4

-687: Start a CfC to publish FPWD of Custom Elements (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/687 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/users/7672#settings

CfC: publish FPWD of HTML Imports; deadline May 4

rt CfC for FPWD of HTML Imports (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/688 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/users/7672#settings

CfC: publish new WD of Introduction to Web Components; deadline May 4

m: ext Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker Reply-To: Web Applications Working Group To: ACTION-689: Start CfC to publish new WD of the Web Components Explainer (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/689 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05

[admin] WebApps' next f2f meeting is Nov 11-12 @ TPAC in Shenzhen China

00 From: ext Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker Reply-To: Web Applications Working Group To: ACTION-692: Announce the WG will meet during TPAC 2013 in November (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/692 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013

[quota-api] Seeking status and plans for Quota Mangement API

Working Group To: ACTION-679: Ask Kinuko about status and plans for Quota Mangement API (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/679 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update

[selectors-api2] Seeking implementation data re Selectors API Level 2

g Group To: ACTION-680: Ask Lachlan if he has some impl data re Selectors API v2 (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/680 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settin

prollyfill registry [Was: Re: URL comparison]

[ sorry for the cross-posting but not clear which list(s) to remove) ] On 5/1/13 6:05 PM, ext Clint Hill wrote: I'd like to add to what Brian is saying below: This is effectively the goal of the public-nextweb group as I see it. We want to provide a way for developers to build these types of pro

Re: ZIP archive API?

Hi Charles, All, Regarding the chartering and scope dimension of your proposal (presumably to formally include in WebApps) ... Other than Mozilla, is there any other implementor interest? I'm wondering if steering this work to a CG would be `best` for now, especially if no one steps up to be

[pointerlock] Re: ACTION-678: Ask Vincent about next step for PointerLock (e.g. what needs to be done to go LC)

ut next step for PointerLock (e.g. what needs to be done to go LC) (Web Applications Working Group) http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/678 On: Arthur Barstow Due: 2013-05-02 If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: http://w

Re: Proposal for a DOM L3 Events Telecon

The PIN for this call (starts at the top of the hour which is 19:00 Boston time) is 26632. On 5/7/13 6:03 PM, ext Travis Leithead wrote: Yeah, we'll be on #webapps, and I can invite Zakim. I can also provide call-in instructions for the Microsoft bridge from irc. -Original Message- Fr

[D3E] Draft minutes from 7-May-2013 call [Was: Re: WebApps DOM3 Events Wiki page]

[ Sorry for the cross-posting. Going forward, let's please use www-dom for D3E discussions, minutes, etc. ] On 5/7/13 9:06 PM, ext Travis Leithead wrote: Hey folks, I just posted the raw minutes to the DOM 3 Events wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/DOM3Events http://www.w3.org/

Re: CfC: Shelve Web Intents, Web Intents Addendum, Pick Media Intent, Pick Contacts Intent, respond by 17 May (next Friday) (resend)

On 5/8/13 4:00 PM, ext frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote: This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to shelve the Web Intents, Web Intents Addendum, Pick Media Intent, and Pick Contacts Intent specifications (4 specs). Shelving in this case means that we are not sure the specifications will advance al

CfC: publish LCWD of Indexed Database; deadline May 16

This is a Call for Consensus to publish a Last Call Working Draft of the Indexed Database spec using the following document as the basis (it does not yet use the LC template): This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record th

CfC: publish new WD of Shadow DOM; deadline May 11

Dimitri would like to publish a new WD of Shadow DOM and this is a Call for Consensus to do so, using the following version of the spec that is already prepared for publication on May 14: Agree

Re: [widgets] Does anyone still care about Widget Updates?

t;http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/imp-report/>.) -AB [1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0256.html> [2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2012OctDec/0261.html> On 10/20/12 8:12 AM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: For vari

RfC: LCWD of Indexed Database; deadline June 7

This is a Request for Comments for the 16 May 2013 Last Call Working Draft of Indexed Database: The comment deadline is June 7 and all comments should be sent to the public-webapps@w3.org list. -Thanks, AB

CfC: publish Widget Updates as a WG Note; deadline May 23

2013 13:33:26 + Resent-From: Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 09:32:22 -0400 From: ext Arthur Barstow To: public-webapps Scott indicated [1] Wookie implemented Widget Updates and Chaals indicated [2] he would followup with Opera but I couldn't find a response from them in the list ar

Re: A very preliminary draft of a URL spec

On 5/20/13 12:54 PM, ext Melvin Carvalho wrote: On 13 May 2013 05:34, Charles McCathie Nevile > wrote: I hope there will be a bugzilla component really very soon, but I neglected to request one so far. Please do post the link to the issue tracker when it's

RfC: 2nd Last Call of "Vibration API"; deadline June 13

[ Bcc: public-script-coord ] WebApps was asked to review DAPWG's Vibration API second LCWD . Individual WG members are encouraged to provide individual feedback. If anyone in WebApps wants to propose an official WG response, please do so ASAP

Re: CfC: publish Widget Updates as a WG Note; deadline May 23

Hi Marcos - since this CfC passed, please prepare a WG Note of this spec for publication on June 4 and notify me (off list) when it is ready. -Thanks, AB On 5/16/13 7:40 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: It appears there is no longer sufficient interest to move the Widget Updates on the

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