W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > January 2016

Re: Musings on PWP Offline/Online Modes

From: Nick Ruffilo <nickruffilo@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 10:37:27 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+Dds5_71egh3kVmQg9Z6Tfhff_rkFVJtMpGcrPRvpv3mvithg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: "Cramer, Dave" <Dave.Cramer@hbgusa.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Tzviya Siegman <tsiegman@wiley.com>, Charles LaPierre <charlesl@benetech.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
Leonard,

That makes sense and you bring up a great point.  The solution to
online/offline should not necessarily BE service workers, but making sure
that our solution is doable using an existing spec or technology is a good
idea.  I was looking at it backwards (or maybe forwards the first time, I'm
a bit spun around).

-Nick

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
wrote:

> Dave and Nick – I agree that discussing something (eg. service workers) as
> one way that an RS might address the problem is certainly in scope, as it
> validates that one can accomplish the task using existing solutions.
> However, I just want to make sure that we are talking about it as one
> possible solution and not the one and only (and/or mandated) solution.
>
> Leonard
>
> From: Nick Ruffilo <nickruffilo@gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 10:30 AM
> To: "Cramer, Dave" <Dave.Cramer@hbgusa.com>
> Cc: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>,
> Tzviya Siegman <tsiegman@wiley.com>, Charles LaPierre <
> charlesl@benetech.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <
> public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Musings on PWP Offline/Online Modes
>
> Maybe I'm just wearing too many hats, and it's constricting the bloodflow
> to my brain, but it seems to be - while we shouldn't actually dictate or
> care how a reading system does something, we should most certainly look to
> solve our problems with existing tools, especially ones that are also part
> of a standards committee and implementation exists.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Cramer, Dave <Dave.Cramer@hbgusa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 5, 2016, at 9:41 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nick – the specifics of how an RS chooses (or not) to cache are out of
>> scope for PWP.  They may make sense for some sort of format-specific work
>> (eg. best practices for PWP with EPUB) but we don’t care about it here.
>>
>> Remember – PWP is format/packaging and implementation agnostic.   (we
>> seemed to all agree to that pre-holidays)
>>
>>
>> The fact that an existing web technology can solve a critical use case
>> for PWP is on-topic in my opinion, and learning about such things can only
>> help our work. Such technologies may not be a part of the documents we
>> produce, but saying "we don't care about it here" I think sends the wrong
>> message.
>>
>> Dave
>> This may contain confidential material. If you are not an intended
>> recipient, please notify the sender, delete immediately, and understand
>> that no disclosure or reliance on the information herein is permitted.
>> Hachette Book Group may monitor email to and from our network.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> - Nick Ruffilo
> @NickRuffilo
> http://Aerbook.com
> http://twitch.tv/TheWizardLlewyn
> http://ZenOfTechnology.com <http://zenoftechnology.com/>
>
>


-- 
- Nick Ruffilo
@NickRuffilo
http://Aerbook.com
http://twitch.tv/TheWizardLlewyn
http://ZenOfTechnology.com <http://zenoftechnology.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 5 January 2016 15:37:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:21 UTC