- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 13:24:50 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org>, Marcos Caceres <mcaceres@mozilla.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 19/06/2013 08:35 , Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Tobie Langel <tobie@w3.org> wrote: >> It would be interesting to list the downsides of this approach to see if the tradeoff is worth making. > > Downsides: > > * More DNS queries. > * More effort to deploy a simple one page application. > * Incompatible with existing web application infrastructure. * Potential for confusion when multiple DNS entries point to the same app (www.foo vs foo). * When Mozilla made this restriction (I don't know if it's still in place) for its apps, developers complained. Overall I do however agree that tying apps to origins has a strong appeal. I like the idea of making the concept of origin somewhat extensible so as to strengthen or specialise it when needed. In this case it could be for path components, but it's also something that's come up in the context of user identity (e.g. adding the identity to the origin so that things like storage key off that and users sharing the same device don't expose their data to one another). -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 24 June 2013 11:24:54 UTC