Closed yoavweiss closed 9 months ago
It's already in CR, we can republish CR drafts (no substantial change) or we need a CR snapshot (if substantial change since last CR). We probably need a wide/horizontal review if we need a new CR snapshot. If no substantial change were made, can we move on to PR, then REC instead?
Looking at the diffs between the published version and the latest, it seems like the main difference is the integration with Fetch and its keep-alive
flag. I don't think this merits a new review cycle.
Moving to PR SGTM, as the WPTs are now green: https://wpt.fyi/results/beacon?label=experimental&label=master&aligned
IIRC, the group generally preferred the CR-snapshot Living Standard model, but in case of Beacon, there's a good chance we can get it to REC and call it done. (as we don't predict any substantive changes in its future)
@caribouW3 - Can we move this to PR? What's the next action on that front?
@yoavweiss We need a CfC to be able to record a WG's decision (for either a new CR Snapshot or a PR)
A CR-snapshot living standard would work better for maintaining the spec in the face of future updates to Fetch, Web IDL, HTML, etc.
Fine by me. @yoavweiss should I issue the CfC then?
I agree with @domenic about a CR-snapshot being the more future-proof route, especially given the work on https://github.com/wicg/unload-beacon which may be a good fit to fold into this spec (if folks are interested). I'll send a CfC for a CR snapshot.
It appears that auto-publishing has been set up already -- my last two merges appear to have updated https://www.w3.org/TR/beacon/ automatically; it's now showing as a CRD there.
The current spec is out of date and should be re-published. Might as well set up autopublishing.
/cc @caribouW3 @nicjansma