W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Structured clone in WebStorage

From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2010 08:45:12 -0500
Message-ID: <4CF7A2E8.9080004@nokia.com>
To: ext Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
CC: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Nov/29/2010 9:59 AM, ext Adrian Bateman wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 24, 2010 3:01 AM, Jeremy Orlow wrote:
>> For over a year now, the WebStorage spec has stipulated that
>> Local/SessionStorage store and retrieve objects per the structured clone
>> algorithm rather than strings.  And yet there isn't a single implementation
>> who's implemented this.  I've talked to people in the know from several of
>> the other major browsers and, although no one is super against implementing
>> it (including us), no one has it on any of their (even internal)
>> roadmaps.  It's just not a high enough priority for anyone at the moment.
>> I feel pretty strongly that we should _at least_ put in some non-normative
>> note that no browser vendor is currently planning on implementing this
>> feature.  Or, better yet, just remove it from the spec until support starts
>> emerging.
> I agree. We have no plans to support this in the near future either. At the
> very least, I think this should be noted as a "feature at risk" in the Call
> for Implementations [1].
I don't have a strong preference for removing this feature or marking it 
as a Feature At Risk when the Candidate is published.

It would be good to get feedback from other implementers (Maciej?, 
Jonas?, Anne?). If no one plans to implement it, perhaps it should just 
be removed.

-Art Barstow
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2010 13:45:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT