Re: [app-uri] Potential for proxying HTTP-based resources

Hi Rich, 


On Thursday, October 17, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:

> I actually agree that it would be nice if this mechanism was made for more general usage, and made a request that Section 6.4 be marked as informative or removed (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2013Apr/0226.html). We decided collectively that the note would be the best way forward.
> 
> The use case that the group has considered from the start was the retrieval of resources from a package, which is a carry-over use case from the widget work in the WebApps WG. I interpreted the note that Marcos added as meaning that if I design a proxy to handle app:URI requests, then I am not bound by the rules/procedures outlined in Section 6.4. However, the response should still be identical (e.g. headers should not affect the response).
> 
> If we are looking at app:URI for not just GET and with header interpretation, then we should probably re-examine the specification for suitability. 
> 


There is no reason we can't build on the spec as we go - but right now it more or less does what we need. So, I'd like to see some kind of implementation first that shows this working with things other than GET. I'm worried of adding more stuff to the spec preemptively when it currently meets a well understood set of use cases across at least two runtimes (Tizen and FxOS).  

 

-- 
Marcos Caceres

Received on Thursday, 17 October 2013 17:25:36 UTC