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

Re: UMP / CORS: Implementor Interest

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:57:29 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTikiV3SZOjypMibcYx4R5ZEwgI590ojyPdSCQPOs@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dirk Pranke <dpranke@google.com>
Cc: Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com>, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, 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 1:34 PM, Dirk Pranke <dpranke@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> If figuring out how to have two specs is too much hassle, you could
> probably get 90%+ of what people are looking for by putting all of the
> normative stuff in the CORS spec and writing an informational note
> describing UMP that only discusses the subset of CORS needed for UMP.

That is exactly what I propose. I'd also call the informational UMP
note developer documentation, and make it easier to read for
developers than what a spec could ever be. But that's less important
if people feel otherwise.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 20:58:23 GMT

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