- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:04:10 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Kenton Varda <kenton@google.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Kenton Varda wrote: > > With the right capability-based infrastructure, the capability-based > solution would be trivial too. We don't have this infrastructure. > This is a valid concern. It's not so much that we don't have one, so much as nobody is proposing one... I'd be happy if there was a concrete proposal on the table that made things as simple as CORS, supported the Web's key use cases as easily, and that the browser vendors were all ready to implement. > You probably also question the effect of my solution on caching, or > other technical issues like that. I could explain how I'd deal with > them, but then you'd find finer details to complain about, and so on. If you're saying that a caps-based infrastructure would have insoluable problems, then that makes it a non-starter. If not, then someone who thinks this is the right way to go should write up the spec on how to do it, and we should iterate it until all the finer details are fixed, just like we do with all specs. > I'm not sure the conversation would benefit anyone, so let's call it a > draw. I'm not in this to win arguments, I'm in this to improve the Web. I'd be more than happy to "lose" if we got something out of it that didn't have technical problems. If there's no concrete proposal on the table that makes things as simple as CORS, supports the Web's key use cases as easily, and that the browser vendors are all ready to implement, then the conversation can indeed not benefit anyone. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Friday, 18 December 2009 08:05:00 UTC