Re: [dispatch] Re-dispatching Web Packaging

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

Needless to say, I think this is a good idea.

Cheers,


> On 16 Feb 2019, at 4:30 am, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hello Dispatch,
> 
> TL;DR: I'd like to request another discussion of Web Packaging at IETF104. We think it'll be ready for a BOF at IETF105, but mnot suggested we take it back here for a second look.
> 
> We dispatched Web Packaging, https://github.com/WICG/webpackage/, at IETF99, with the discussion at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/lZohQ8ypodcpB2f_jhxoBRMYl0o. On your advice, we split the proposal into two pieces, "signed exchanges", and "bundles". We also created the https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wpack/ mailing list, although it hasn't seen as much activity as the github issue tracker.
> 
> The signed exchanges specification is mostly complete, in an IETF draft that specifies the format: https://wicg.github.io/webpackage/draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed-responses.html, and a WICG draft that specifies how it integrates with Fetch: https://wicg.github.io/webpackage/loading.html. We've implemented that specification in Chromium, run an origin trial in Chrome, and will be shipping the current version in Chrome 73: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/blink-dev/gPH_BcOBEtc/discussion.
> 
> Despite shipping the current version, we expect standards bodies to make more changes, and we've built in a way to migrate users to new versions of the specification.
> 
> The Bundles specification is very roughly sketched, but we expect to flesh that out and start implementing it in the next few months.
> 
> The W3C TAG recently discussed the state of things at https://github.com/w3ctag/meetings/blob/gh-pages/2019/02-tokyo/02-06-minutes.md#signed-exchanges-and-bundling.
> 
> Mark Nottingham and a representative of the TAG are organizing an "ESCAPE" conference at a TBD date to help publishers organize their feedback on the proposals. This has been pushed back a couple times, but it sounds like it's more solidly planned for either May or July before IETF105.
> 
> We think we'll be able to write a WG charter that we can discuss in a BOF at IETF105, with the goal of handing control of the specifications to a more formal group. However, mnot suggested that we come back to DISPATCH to see if anyone's sense of the right plan has changed now that we have a little more experience with the proposals.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jeffrey
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/