- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 19:54:27 +0200
- To: "Tyler Close" <tyler.close@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Adam Barth" <w3c@adambarth.com>, "Arthur Barstow" <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
On Tue, 11 May 2010 19:48:57 +0200, Tyler Close <tyler.close@gmail.com> wrote: > Firefox, Chrome and Caja have now all declared an interest in > implementing UMP. Opera and Safari have both declared an interest in > implementing the functionality defined in UMP under the name CORS. I > think it's clear that UMP has sufficient implementor interest to > proceed along the standardization path. > > In the discussion on chromium-dev, Adam Barth wrote: > > """ > Putting these together, it looks like we want a separate UMP > specification for web developers and a combined CORS+UMP specification > for user agent implementors. Consequently, I think it makes sense for > the working group to publish UMP separately from CORS but have all the > user agent conformance requirements in the combined CORS+UMP document. > """ > > See: > > http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev/msg/4793e08f8ec98914?hl=en_US > > I think this is a satisfactory compromise and conclusion to the > current debate. Anne, are you willing to adopt this strategy? If so, I > think there needs to be a normative statement in the CORS spec that > identifies the algorithms and corresponding inputs that implement UMP. I don't understand. As far as I can tell Adam suggests making UMP an authoring guide. Why would CORS need to normatively depend on it? > Before sending UMP to Last Call, we need a CORS and UMP agreement on > response header filtering. We need to reconcile the following two > sections: > > http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/access-control/#handling-a-response-to-a-cross-origin-re > > and > > http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/#response-header-filtering > > Remaining subset issues around caching and credentials can be > addressed with editorial changes to CORS. I'll provide more detail in > a later email, assuming we've reached a compromise. I think we first need to figure out whether we want to rename headers or not, before any draft goes to Last Call, especially if UMP wants to remain a subset of some sorts. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 2010 18:30:16 UTC