Re: Request to move app: URI to FPWD

On 18/04/2013 18:26 , Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:
>> If you can describe how it is possible to have a Web-based
>> Execution Model that does not feature a notion of origin — and
>> therefore potentially a scheme — then I can understand how this may
>> not be clearly in scope. But I really can't think of a situation in
>> which this would not be needed.
>
> We have a difference in understanding about the necessity of what is
> being proposed in this particular specification, and whether there in
> fact is a change in technical scope as anticipated by the charter.  I
> believe that Marcos is proposing something new as a replacement to
> file://, fs://, efs://.  Although the discussion in the F2F last week
> certainly helped me understand better why some people in the group
> feel a new URI scheme is needed, I am not convinced that existing
> schemes that have been used by native OS's for a long time are
> insufficient to meet the needs of Web OS implementations.   This spec
> covers new subject matter that was not anticipated by the charter
> IMO.

I think that you may be under that impression because you are missing 
some history, and perhaps did not fully investigate the field during 
charter review. The debate about whether a packaged runtime requires a 
new scheme has been done to death. WebApps went through all the very 
last details of it, even going multiple rounds with the TAG and IANA on 
this. Barring new technical information, I think that debate is settled, 
dead, and buried.

>> The alternative is to recharter this group, which will require
>> voting by the AC and everyone on this group to re-join.  I don't
>> really understand what that would achieve, unless it's a delaying
>> tactic.
>
> I would request that you assume I am acting in good faith.

If I didn't believe there to be a chance you are acting in good faith, I 
wouldn't bother arguing with you and would simply recommend that the 
objection be ignored.

I do, however, have to understand what you are trying to achieve with 
your objection if it is to be addressed. And in plain and simple 
honesty, I fail to see what else could come of it other than using up 
time. Would you care to enlighten me?

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon

Received on Friday, 19 April 2013 08:26:31 UTC