Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[template] drop 'intent to implement' language. #437

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 26, 2023

Conversation

hober
Copy link
Member

@hober hober commented Sep 11, 2023

Fixes #436.

@hober
Copy link
Member Author

hober commented Sep 11, 2023

@jyasskin

@hober
Copy link
Member Author

hober commented Sep 11, 2023

see also patcg/patwg-charter#71

Copy link
Member

@jyasskin jyasskin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note that this only fixes the first half of #436.

@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ <h2>Success Criteria</h2>
</p>

<!-- Relevance and momentum -->
<p><span class='todo'>Consider adding this clause if the Group does not intend to move to REC:</span> All new features should be supported by at least two intents to implement before being incorporated in the specification.</p>
<p><span class='todo'>Consider adding this clause if the Group does not intend to move to REC:</span> All new features should have expressions of interest from at least two potential implementors before being incorporated in the specification.</p>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just double-checking: Do you think "interest" is sufficient, or should this match the WHATWG working mode in requiring "support"? I think I'll be happier about "interest" once there's also an indication at the CR phase of which features have 2 implementations, and I'm fine with merging this PR in the expectation that that text will arrive later.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd be fine with the WHATWG wording.

@AramZS
Copy link
Member

AramZS commented Sep 12, 2023

👍

@sideshowbarker sideshowbarker force-pushed the gh-pages branch 8 times, most recently from d993f88 to 122f334 Compare September 19, 2023 11:04
@plehegar plehegar changed the title drop 'intent to implement' language. [template] drop 'intent to implement' language. Sep 25, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@svgeesus svgeesus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is better wording. Fine to merge, but if people prefer other wording lets see that (so I will approve but not merge)

@svgeesus svgeesus merged commit 4e7d297 into w3c:gh-pages Oct 26, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[template] Rethink the "intents to implement" wording
5 participants