W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: RfC: moving Web Storage to WG Note; deadline June 29

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:20:45 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTimMKaYMfACj=SjCz32MAf+_WL6DPA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Marcos Caceres
> <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:01:59 +0200, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Comments on this proposal are welcome and please send them by June 27 at
>>>> the latest.
>>>
>>> I don't think this make sense. Unless it is removed from browsers it is part
>>> of the web platform and as such requires normative documentation.
>>
>> I agree with Anne. Can we just agree on the bits that are implemented
>> (i.e., drop the structured clones stuff), show interop through a test
>> suite? Despite the mutex issue, this is still a simple and useful API
>> for a vast number of use cases.
>
> The use cases being "environments which are single-process, i.e. in a
> near future not any major browsers" and "environments where you don't
> care about bugs here and there due to race conditions"?

Browser extensions might fit this use case (both Chrome and Opera make
use of localStorage for extensions).

See:
http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/faq.html#faq-dev-08
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/opera-extensions-options-page/

Browser extensions are in every browser, so in a sense are part of the
web platform.




-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 12:21:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:45 GMT