- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:41:46 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:54:35 +0100, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > below is some feedback on "Offline Web Applications" (Editor's Draft 17 > November 2007) (<http://dev.w3.org/html5/offline-webapps/>). Thanks. Since there was some interest in this draft I got ACTION-58 to address the feedback given in this e-mail. > Summary: if the intent of this is to make people aware of the presence > of these new things in HTML5, it's working. However, in it's current > state it really requires the reader to go to the real spec to understand > what's going on -- that may be ok, but in this case it would be helpful > if it could point directly to the section of HTML5 containing the full > details. I added the two relevant pointers to the introduction section: http://dev.w3.org/html5/offline-webapps/#introduction > Content: > > 2. SQL -- Not being familiar with what is being defined, I found the > example a bit confusing. If this is meant to be an introduction, I think > it would make sense to (1) show the DB creation first and (2) add a few > sentences about how the API exactly looks like. So what elements does > openDatabase() take(), why does db.transaction take a function argument, > what exactly does the executeSQL function expect parameter-wise? Done. > 3. Offline Application Caching APIs -- seems the spec defines a new text > format for defining the application caching. Is there a MIME type being > defined? Any grammar for the format? Turns out this is defined in > <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#manifests>, so it's probably fine to > leave it out here. However, *what* is defined over there ("Note: This is > a willful double violation of RFC2046.") makes me nervous. Not sure why > this isn't simply an XML format; instead of defining yet another special > text format with (IMHO) quite obscure parsing rules (CR only as line > delimiter???) This seems to be feedback on HTML 5 rather the note so I'm unable to address this. > 3. Offline Application Caching APIs -- not sure that using "server.cgi" > as a name is a good idea over here; my understanding was that Cool URIs > Do Not Change, thus encoding some technology-specific extension into an > URI generally is not a good idea. Suggest to simply use something like > "events". I think "server.cgi" more accurately indicates it takes a URI than if we just used the "events" so I left at is. (If the technology changes a permanent redirect can be used or you simply change the type using a ForceType directive or something like that. Should not be much trouble.) > Editorial: > > - The Javascript examples do not terminate statements with a semicolon. > My understanding is that although it's legal, it's discouraged (see > <http://www.jslint.com/lint.html>). Minimally, it's confusing to read > for people who have grown up with C and Java. I like writing JavaScript that way, but I got another example that included them. So this is addressed now. > - "...that takes up one mebibyte of storage." -- Typo? This no longer appears in the draft. (It was not a typo though, a mebibyte is the "official" name for 1024^2 bytes.) -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 13:42:12 UTC