W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2017

Re: [whatwg] Accessing local files with JavaScript portably and securely

From: Roger Hågensen <rh_whatwg@skuldwyrm.no>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 09:57:28 +0200
To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Message-ID: <7064ee33-8417-062b-fec3-1a60800ff423@skuldwyrm.no>
On 2017-04-17 19:19, duanyao wrote:
>>> There are always incompatibilities
>>> between browsers, and even once standardized feature can be
>>> deprecated/removed in future, e.g. `window.showModalDialog()`,
>>> `<applet>` and `<keygen>`.
>> This happens rarely and when it happens it's a very considered
>> decision involving lots of people. It's usually related to complexity,
>> lack of use, and security.
> Sure. Proprietary OSes don't change thier core API in incompatibe way
> for no good reason, too.
>
> I don't expect a local web app tested on major OSes today would stop to
> work tomorrow due to a filesystem API change.

It's probably more likely that a online web app will stop functioning 
than a local/offline web app. When it's local there is only the browser 
and OS involved. Online you have the 
OS+Browser+Router+ISP+Proxies+Webserver(+cache)+possibly Serverside 
scripting.


Arguing about the manifest/statement of WHATWG and what is within the 
scope of WHATWG may be irrelevant.

Think of the end user first. If a end user "saves" a online webapp they 
expect it to work offline too. And in my eyes there is no reason why it 
should not.

Now I have not tested this yet but if a html page has links to other 
html pages or files one would assume those files are also saved.

Likewise if a user drags a file from a folder to say a soundbank app and 
then they close it and open it the next day only to find it empty again 
as paths can't be stored they'd think the app is broken (or that html 
apps sucks).


This can be partially fixed by making the user typed in file paths 
manually, but this is very use unfriendly.

That a html "app" can work online, offline, and locally, is one of the 
biggest benefits it has over other languages/program environments.

Microsoft already does something similar with it's UWP apps which can be 
html and javascript based.

Personally I like the idea of a app that has it's source open, issues 
could technically be fixed without having to get the source code (as the 
app is the source code) nor a need to recompile it with the exact same 
developer setup/compiler/IDE. It's also relatively easy to inspect.

Searching Google for "offline webapp discussion group" turns up
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Offline_web_applications_workshop
and that's sadly from 2011.

There is https://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/

Now I know that WHATWG and W3 Working Group is not the same thing,
but if W3C thinks that offline apps are part of the web but WHATWG does 
not then that creates a huge chasm as WHATWG would then ignore all 
offline stuff.

I always assumed that WHATWG was a fast track variant of W3C. 
Brainstorming stuff, getting it tested/used in browsers then seeing what 
sticks to the wall and once things become stable the W3C will hammer it 
in stone. Is that assumption wrong?


-- 
Unless specified otherwise, anything I write publicly is considered 
Public Domain (CC0).
Roger Hågensen,
Freelancer, Norway.
Received on Tuesday, 18 April 2017 07:58:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 18 April 2017 07:58:06 UTC