- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 16:54:47 +0100
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- CC: "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
On 17/09/13 15:54, Marcos Caceres wrote: > > On Tuesday, September 17, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Dave Raggett wrote: > >> I've been asked for a clear statement over the direction of work in >> SysApps on the runtime and security model and would appreciate your help >> with this. I understand that the current editor's draft for the runtime >> and security model specification is likely to need substantial >> modifications before it can be transitioned into a First Public Working >> Draft. Can anyone explain what the problem areas are that are holding us >> back? > > It's too hard a problem - with little return if we standardize it. > Runtimes already support their own runtime security models… the only > thing that might be useful there is some of the lifecycle events, but > those apply equally to web pages and packaged apps (so should really > be defined in HTML). > >> We have already split off the packaging model to Web Apps and the >> Application Lifecycle and Events to the spec Anssi and Kenneth are >> editing. What about the use cases and requirements -- where are these >> documented and could we progress them separately? >> > > Yes, this is what Anssi and Kenneth have been doing in their doc. So am I correct in that we don't expect to have a standard covering the permissions requested in app manifests? Won't this cause interop problems for system applications across different run-times? Many thanks, -- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 15:55:18 UTC