- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:46:07 -0500
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: www-archive@w3.org
Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 17:59:04 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com> wrote: >> I'm ashamed to say that if there is a circular dependency involving >> offline, it isn't obvious to this reader, and I would greatly >> appreciate it some kind soul would point it out. > > Search for "manifest" throughout the specification and look at the fifth > paragraph of the second subsection of #offline which is quite explicit > about this. I guess I shouldn't be shocked by people not reading the > specification, but when asking specific questions like this it would > sort of help to first check, I think. raise Exception("Rudeness") > (It is also not clear to me why not having an answer to this question in > any way delays your review of the introductory note Ian and I wrote.) I was going to look into this further, but as you seem to be in a hurry, I guess the following will have to do: No. SQL and offline application caching APIs would clearly be a good thing; my only issue is the scope question. Please treat this answer as if it were "yes, but only if the charter was modified first". - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 20:46:43 UTC