W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: [DataCache] Updated Examples

From: Nikunj R. Mehta <nikunj.mehta@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:46:44 -0800
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-Id: <6B917288-875C-4EBB-BCAD-B0AF9EBF4210@oracle.com>
To: Joseph Pecoraro <joepeck02@gmail.com>

On Jan 1, 2010, at 12:34 PM, Joseph Pecoraro wrote:

>> I have updated the examples with the new API. Please let me know if
>> you see any issues now. Thanks a lot for the detailed feedback.
>
> Sure, these all deal with section 4.1.1 Examples in new
> January 1, 2010 Editors Draft:
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#examples
>
>
> ---- Old Issues ----
>
>  - setting data on the Mutable response should use the methods defined
>    in the IDL, and not the properties (which I assume are readonly).
>
>    setting the statusCode and statusLine on the should use
>    MutableHttpResponse#setStatus
>    http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-MutableHttpResponse-setStatus
>
>    setting bodyText should use MutableHttpResponse#setResponseHeader
>    http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-MutableHttpResponse-setResponseText
>
>    setting headers should use MutableHttpResponse#setResponseHeader
>    http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-MutableHttpResponse-setResponseHeader
>
>    Something like the following from the previous email:
>
>      response.setStatus(200, 'HTTP/1.1 200 OK');
>      response.setResponseText(request.bodyText);
>      response.setResponseHeader('Content-Type', ...);
>      response.send();
>
Done

>
>  - if you still intend statusLine to be the full HTTP status line, I  
> would
>    suggestion changing the current version to more standard values:
>    (NOTE: These appear in multiple examples)
>
>      'HTTP/1.1 OK'          => 'HTTP/1.1 200 OK'
>      'HTTP/1.1 Bad Request' => 'HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request'
>
>
Changed

>
> ---- New Issues ----
>
>  - The second example has:
>
>    [[
>      window.navigator.registerOfflineHandler(uri, local);
>    ]]
>
>    However, the specification for registerOfflineHandler claims the  
> third
>    parameter to registerOfflineHandler is not optional:
>    http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-NavigatorLocalServer-registerOfflineHandler
>
>    My Suggestion:
>    Make the review handler optional. Since you may not always want  
> to use
>    a reviewer. Forcing it (like Firefox enforces the 3rd parameter on
>    addEventListener) can cause developer headaches.
>
>
The reviewer function is now optional in the API and networking model.  
It already was in the conceptual model.

>
> ---- Nit Picking ----
>
>  - I suggested using "var cache" in the last example, for good  
> practice
>    (even though the code looks like it is in the global scope):
>
>      [[
>        cache = window.applicationCache;
>      ]]
>
>    Would become:
>
>        var cache = window.applicationCache;

Done.

>
>  - A variable "type" appears out of nowhere. It would be nice to  
> clarify:
>
>      [[
>        response.headers['Content-Type'] = type;
>      ]]
>
>    Could become a number of options. For instance:
>
>        response.headers['Content-Type'] = request.headers['Content- 
> Type'] || 'text/plain';
>

Done.

>
>  - There is a line without a semicolon. For consistancy it would be  
> nice:
>
>      [[
>        var txn = cache.request.result
>      ]]
>
>    Would become:
>
>        var txn = cache.request.result;
>

Done

>
> ---- Questions ----
>
>  - It would be nice to see examples of:
>
>    - CacheTransactionRequest#incrementPendingUpdates and decrement
>      I am interested to know why they are useful.
>      http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-CacheTransactionRequest-incrementPendingUpdates
>      http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-CacheTransactionRequest-decrementPendingUpdates
>
>    - ApplicationCache2Request-openModifiedItemCursor
>      This seems like an important concept for synchronization!
>      http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/DataCache/#widl-ApplicationCache2Request-openModifiedItemCursor
>
>    - Registering an event listener, for one of the CacheEvent's.
>      This would clarify Cache Host registration.
>
>
I will leave this for a future WD.

Nikunj Mehta
http://blog.o-micron.com
Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2010 00:48:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:36 GMT