- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 13:51:56 +0100
- To: "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- CC: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>, Claes1 Nilsson <Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com>, Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen@gmail.com>, Anders Isberg <Anders.Isberg@sonymobile.com>
On 04/10/13 12:32, Kostiainen, Anssi wrote: > By "this work" I referred to ServiceWorkers. Sorry, if that was unclear. Thanks. Do we have a pointer to ServiceWorkers? This is related to Web Workers (currently in CR) as standardized by the WebApps WG, right? I understand the need for apps that run for extended periods of time, e.g. whenever a device is powered up. Such apps may run in the background, akin to Android services. >> If we see a need for rechartering, fine, but there is a definite >> cost to doing it. Can we clarify where the current charter is >> insufficient? > Based on the recent discussion on the list, it seems the group may > want to re-evaluate the expectations set for the "Execution Model" > and "Security Model". Specifically, the current charter uses wording > such as "how XXX differs from the traditional browser-based XXX". > However, I'm hearing diverging too far from the current browser-based > model may not be what the group wants. This is indeed confusing. Ordinary apps need to be executed in the regular browser security context, and the browser limits access to the device capabilities. This is where the DAP WG APIs fit in. SysApps was chartered for situations where apps need richer access, analogous to the capabilities available to native apps on Android. Such apps are trusted in this way either because they were pre-installed or have been signed by a trusted party that vouches for them. This is independent of whether the apps resources are locally saved at install time or dynamically loaded at run time. Permissions may be granted at install time, or at run-time as appropriate. If I have it right, we envisage a need for a persistent service akin to Android services, and based upon Web Workers. These could be trusted "system" services, or untrusted services with very restricted access to device capabilities. I think this still fits within the SysApps charter, as it is essentially about the run-time model. Web Workers clearly belong to Web Apps WG, but perhaps all we need is a complementary spec that deals with the additional requirements for system level services. > It could be this does not require rechartering at all, just > clarifying the goals and the scope without rechartering formally. We could provide clarification on the SysApps home page, with additional background on the wiki, or even produce a Working Group Note that sets out the assumptions clearly. Best regards, -- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 4 October 2013 12:52:31 UTC