W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: TAG Comment on

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:30:15 +1100
Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, public-webapps@w3.org, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <5824963D-8D68-4C8C-B7D4-440A93688527@mnot.net>
To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Yes, if you configure your browser to do so, you'll be assaulted with requests for a "test db" from many Web sites that use common frameworks.

I don't think that this should count as "use." 

I do think now is precisely the time to be asking this kind of question; these features are NOT yet used at *Web* scale -- they're used by people willing to live on the bleeding edge, and therefore willing to accept risk of change.

One of the problems with lumping in a lot of new feature development with a spec maintenance / interop effort is confusion like this. Hopefully, the W3C (and others) will learn from this.



On 16/11/2011, at 9:47 AM, Adam Barth wrote:

> These APIs are quite widely used on the web.  It seems unlikely that
> we'll be able to delete either of them in favor of a single facility.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com> wrote:
>> This is a comment from the W3C Technical Architecture Group on the last call
>> working draft: "Web Storage" [1].
>> 
>> The HTML5 Application Cache (AppCache) [2] and Local Storage [1] both
>> provide client-side storage that can be used by Web Applications. Although
>> the interfaces are different (AppCache has an HTML interface while Local
>> Storage has a JavaScript API), and they do seem to have been designed with
>> different use cases in mind, they provide somewhat related facilities: both
>> cause persistent storage for an application to be created, accessed and
>> managed locally at the client. If, for example, the keys in Local Storage
>> were interpreted as URIs then Local Storage could be used to store manifest
>> files and Web Applications could be written to look transparently for
>> manifest files in either the AppCache or in Local Storage. One might also
>> envision common facilities for querying the size of or releasing all of the
>> local storage for a given application.
>> 
>> At the Offline Web Applications Workshop on Nov 5, 2011 [3] there was a
>> request for a JavaScript API for AppCache and talk about coordinating
>> AppCache and Local Storage.
>> 
>> The TAG believes it is important to consider more carefully the potential
>> advantages of providing a single facility to cover the use cases, of perhaps
>> modularizing the architecture so that some parts are shared, or if separate
>> facilities are indeed the best design, providing common data access and
>> manipulation APIs. If further careful analysis suggests that no such
>> integration is practical, then, at a minimum, each specification should
>> discuss how it is positioned with respect to the other.
>> 
>> Noah Mendelsohn
>> For the: W3C Technical Architecture Group
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-webstorage-20111025/
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/offline.html#appcache
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/web-apps-ws/
>> 
>> 
> 

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 20 November 2011 23:30:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:48 GMT