W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: UMP / CORS: Implementor Interest

From: Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 12:01:16 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTiltBhKty1Qv2Lt13g4_0mQlw_y90kvhNTWRlyvA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>, Arthur Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
> What is the difference between an "authoring guide" and a "specification for
> web developers"?

The difference is whether or not the normative statements in UMP
actually are normative for a CORS implementation. This comes down to
whether or not a developer reading UMP can trust what it says, or must
he also read the CORS spec.

> The key point of making this distinction is that
> implementors should be able to look solely at the combined spec.

No, the key point is to relieve developers of the burden of reading
and understanding CORS. The CORS spec takes on the burden of restating
UMP in its own algorithmic way so that an implementor can read only
CORS.

--Tyler

-- 
"Waterken News: Capability security on the Web"
http://waterken.sourceforge.net/recent.html
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 19:01:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:38 GMT