- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 10:17:17 -0800
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>, "ext Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
I'd be happy to help with #3. Adam On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Given the feedback on this thread, my proposal on the next steps are: > > 1. Mark and/or Tyler prepare a FPWD of UM > > 2. Anne proactively drive CORS to LCWD > > 3. Before we begin a CfC to publish #1 and #2 above, some combination of the > active participants in the CORS and UM discussions (Adam, Anne, Jonas, > Maciej, Hixie, Tyler, Mark, etc.) create a comparison document of CORS and > UM (e.g. pros, cons, overlaps, etc.) as Nikunj did for the group's two DB > specs [1]. This document does not necessarily need to be exhaustive. Who can > commit to helping with this document? > > -Art Barstow > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Database > > > On Dec 10, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston) wrote: > >> CORS and Uniform Messaging People, >> >> We are now just a few weeks away from the February 2006 start of what >> has now become the CORS spec. In those four years, the model has been >> significantly improved, Microsoft deployed XDR, we now have the >> Uniform Messaging counter-proposal. Meanwhile, the industry doesn't >> have an agreed standard to address the important use cases. >> >> Although we are following the Darwinian model of competing specs with >> Web SQL Database and Indexed Database API, I believe I'm not alone in >> thinking competing specs in the CORS and UM space is not desirable >> and perhaps even harmful. >> >> Ideally, the group would agree on a single model and this could be >> achieved by converging CORS + UM, abandoning one model in deference >> to the other, etc. >> >> Can we all rally behind a single model? >> >> -Art Barstow >> >> >> On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:30 PM, ext Mark S. Miller wrote: >> >>> We intend that Uniform Messaging be adopted instead of CORS. We intend >>> that those APIs that were expected to utilize CORS (SSE, XBL) instead >>> utilize Uniform Messaging. As for XHR2, we intend to propose a similar >>> UniformRequest that utilizes Uniform Messaging. >>> >>> We intend the current proposal, Uniform Messaging Level One, as an >>> alternative to the pre-flight-less subset of CORS. As for the >>> remaining Level Two issues gated on pre-flight, perhaps these are best >>> addressed after we settle the SOP restrictions that server-side app >>> authors may count on, which therefore protocols such as CORS and >>> Uniform Messaging must uphold. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Arthur Barstow >>> <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Mark, Tyler, >>>> >>>> On Nov 23, 2009, at 12:33 PM, ext Tyler Close wrote: >>>> >>>>> I made some minor edits and formatting improvements to the document >>>>> sent out on Friday. The new version is attached. If you read the >>>>> prior >>>>> version, there's no need to review the new one. If you're just >>>>> getting >>>>> started, use the attached copy. >>>> >>>> Would you please clarify your intent with your Uniform Messaging >>>> proposal >>>> vis-à-vis CORS and your expectation(s) from the Working Group? >>>> >>>> -Art Barstow >> >> >> > >
Received on Monday, 14 December 2009 18:18:10 UTC