- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 19:38:11 +0200
- To: Gregg Tavares <gman@google.com>
- Cc: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Gregg Tavares <gman@google.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 18:48:52 +0200, Gregg Tavares <gman@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Has there been any consideration of switching the spec to a stream-able >>> format like gzipped tar files? It seems like a shame to miss this use >>> case. >> >> A streamable container, while intriguing, also has issues. For streaming >> to be of use, you need to specify the order of resources: the widget's >> configuration file and start file should be the first two files in the >> resource bundle. Are there readily available (on all major platforms) tools >> that do this, easily? > > Yes, Linux and OSX have gzip and tar. Tar puts the files in the order given. > > Windows has 7zip (open source) and rar (shareware) which will make gzipped > tar files and also puts the files in the order given. Our design goal [1] was always to use the lowest common denominator (i.e., some packaging format that was available natively on all platforms... [un]fortunately, Zip was the only realistic option). Having said that, there is no reason not to standardize a format as the one Gregg is suggesting. However, this would be separate from the current spec (which is already feature complete and looking for implementations). [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/ >> >> (Other than that, see timeless' comments about this really being too late >> for the current spec) >> -- >> Arve Bersvendsen >> >> Opera Software ASA, http://www.opera.com/ > > -- Marcos Caceres Opera Software ASA, http://www.opera.com/ http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 17:38:59 UTC