TPAC planning and specification status report

[LJWatson]

TPAC will be virtual this year. W3C is finalising the details but it is likely there will be events for the whole W3C community during the week of 26 to 31 October (as originally planned), with WG able to organise their own meetings in/around that week.

There are two things we need you to do:

1. Let @marcoscaceres and I know before 17 July if you want meeting time to talk about your specification.
2. Post a specification status report before 30 September.

The specification status report should include:

• What progress has your spec made in the last 12 months?
• Is anything blocking your spec from moving to CR?
• If yes, what is your plan to unblock it and do you need any help?

Your specification status report from 2019 is at #316

[martinthomson]

The status from the previous report applies, with the exception of TPAC attendance.

[marcoscaceres]

@martinthomson, @beverloo, would you feel comfortable if, for the purpose of moving the spec forward along the Rec Track, we (i.e., me) built a test suite solely around the IDL and registration algorithms? That would at least demonstrate interop at the API level and might be sufficient for us to finish this off (and hopefully show there isn't too much introp deviation between implementations).

It doesn't look like there are more features or blocking bugs in the spec itself. If there are, let me know and I can try to address them.

[martinthomson]

I have no objection to other people doing work :)

If it were possible to build a WPT that only worked live (because it depends on the various cloud services that browsers use), that would be ideal. It's not awesome in the sense that you can't rely on it for CI systems, but manual verification goes a long way. (If the standard had been properly successful and browsers had open interfaces to their push services, it would be different, but that never happened. I guess we can only dream. Firefox almost made it there.)