Closed sefeng211 closed 1 year ago
also it's still called Editor's Draft
, should it be changed to Working Draft
or something since it's adopted?
@yoavweiss
ED is still correct right now. I think we'd need to do a little bit of process to make it a WD -- at least a call for objections, and WG approval to publish it as the FPWD.
/cc @caribouW3
Seems like the group is already indicated, but that doesn't result in any visible changes to the published draft. @tabatkins - is there anything we need to do on the bikeshed side to add such an indication?
OK, it seems like the webperf template doesn't indicate the WG for an ED. So the action item here is probably to move this (and maybe Event Timing) to a FPWD.
Added this to the agenda for today's WG discussion.
Just FYI, the boilerplate files you want to be looking at are https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed-boilerplate/tree/main/boilerplate/webperf
We sent a CFC a while ago and heard no objections. @caribouW3 - can we publish a FPWD for both LCP and Event Timing?
We sent a CFC a while ago and heard no objections. @caribouW3 - can we publish a FPWD for both LCP and Event Timing?
We published both FPWD on May 24th. Do you mean to ask for a wide review?
Apologies. I confused myself...
I think this can be closed. @sefeng211 - do you agree?
https://www.w3.org/TR/largest-contentful-paint/ includes a clear indication. Closing (but feel free to reopen)
Hi all,
Should we update the 'Status of this document' to indicate that LCP has been adopted by WebPerfWG? I believe this is what normally happens when an standard gets adopted.