Re: How to standardize new Offline Web app features? [Was Re: Offline Web Applications status]

> How to standardize new Offline Web app features?

Something that can help with 'standardizing' a new feature is an
implementation. Maybe I can help on that one by building the list of
features mentioned earlier in this thread [1] into chrome. The first three
bullets are fairly easy to come by but the fourth bullet will take some
time, but once four is done, five should just fall out.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/1121.html
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/1121.html>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com> wrote:

> Hi Art,
>
> Please don't assume I know how the w3c works. I'm not subscribed to the
> public-html list and honestly don't have  a good understanding of which list
> is for what. I consider the feature set provided in by the Application Cache
> to harmonize with other topics discussed on the public-webapps list, so it
> seemed like the natural place to discuss it. Actually Louis-Rémi started
> the thread to which I responded.
>
> Interesting question about moving the Offline Web Applications out of HTML5
> to a new home. I doesn't matter to me where this is spec'd or discussed so
> much, what matters is that progress is made as I think it's clear there is
> demand for "more" in this area. I have not been party to any discussions
> about relocating the Offline WebApps part of the HTML5 spec. Since you
> asked, I'm guessing you think that could help with making faster progress?
>
> -Michael
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 3:51 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>wrote:
>
>> Michael, All,
>>
>> On Mar/31/2011 6:18 PM, ext Michael Nordman wrote:
>>
>>> I have in mind several extensions to the ApplicationCache that I think
>>> could address some of the additional desirements from the web developement
>>> community. I'll post them here because people seem to be more willing to
>>> have a discussion on the topic here than over in whatwg.
>>>
>>
>> From the process perspective, I think it is fine to discuss this feature
>> on public-webapps but since Offline Web applications is defined in the HTML5
>> spec, I am curious why you didn't use the public-html list.
>>
>> BTW, has there been any discussion (e.g. in the WHATWG or HTMLWG) about
>> moving the Offline Web application  out of the HTMLWG's HTML5 spec and into
>> a separate spec? I'm wondering if that could help facilitate the
>> standardization of new features like those you proposed in this thread [1].
>>
>> -Art Barstow
>>
>> [1]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JanMar/1121.html
>>
>>
>>
>