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).


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

Marcos Caceres
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 12:21:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 14:36:50 UTC