Open anssiko opened 4 years ago
Thanks to your contributions, we were able to reduce the number of open issues blocking Proposed Rec publication significantly.
The remaining Proposed Rec blockers and their current status are the following:
*-manual.html
): https://wpt.live/remote-playback/ (GH repo)Process quirk: #92 proposes to add new API surface that requires us to publish a revised CR (incl. conduct wide review for this delta prior), before PR. (WebDriver extensions not added to the specification at this time.)
With #125 closed, the only remaining Proposed Rec blocker is #92 Remote Playback API test automation.
@Honry is no longer working on this task, so per TPAC discussion @louaybassbouss took an action to figure out a way forward.
Status update on the publication blockers https://github.com/w3c/remote-playback/issues/130#issuecomment-576232968:
*-manual.html
) that combined have adequate test coverage.To show adequate implementation experience and advance the spec to its next maturity stage, the group is expected to create a manual implementation report. Following up on that in #92.
This meta issue tracks progress toward the Remote Playback API Proposed Recommendation (PR) publication. Editor: @mounirlamouri
You see many tickboxes below, but fear not. Almost all of them are administrative in nature and we'll bite that bullet for you with @tidoust. In fact, only the following needs explicit input from the group:
TL;DR: before advancing to PR the group needs to identify whether any of the issues raised since 2017-10-19 are substantive and address them, or whether they should be deferred to the next version of the API.
Please provide your feedback by 2020-01-17.
The general requirements for advancement:
[ ] must record the group's decision to request advancement.
[ ] must obtain Director approval.
[x] must provide public documentation of all substantive changes to the technical report since the previous publication.
[ ] must formally address all issues raised about the document since the previous maturity level.
[x] must provide public documentation of any Formal Objections.
The general should requirements aka nice-to-haves
[ ] should provide public documentation of changes that are not substantive.
[ ] should report which, if any, of the Working Group's requirements for this document have changed since the previous step.
[ ] should report any changes in dependencies with other groups.
[ ] should provide information about implementations known to the Working Group.
The PR-specific requirements for advancement: