Re: TAG Comment on

Noah - FYI, I updated [Action-640] to include the TAG's comment [LC-2] 
(it originally was only for Ashok's personal comment [Ashok]) and 
updated LC-2 to connect it to Action-640.

-AB

[Action-640] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/actions/640
[LC-2] 
http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011#LC-2
[Ashok] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0837.html

On 11/18/11 10:44 AM, ext Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
> > Noah - the TAG's comment has been added to the comment tracking 
> document
> > for this LC:
> >
> > 
> http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011#LC-2
>
> Thank you.
>
> Noah
>
> On 11/18/2011 10:01 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> Noah - the TAG's comment has been added to the comment tracking document
>> for this LC:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/WebStorage-Comments-LC-25Oct2011#LC-2 
>>
>>
>> If anyone wants to propose extensions or changes to Web Storage, 
>> please use
>> [Bugzilla] and please feel free to contribute to the group's [Database]
>> wiki e.g. to clarify the relationship between Web Storage and HTML5's
>> AppCache.
>>
>> If you have any additional feedback, please reply by November 25, the 
>> day
>> the CfC to publish a Candidate Recommendation of Web Storage ends [CfC].
>>
>> -Art Barstow
>>
>> [Bugzilla]
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/describecomponents.cgi?product=WebAppsWG
>> [Database] http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/wiki/Database
>> [CfC] 
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/0998.html
>>
>> On 11/15/11 5:05 PM, ext Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
>>> This is a comment from the W3C Technical Architecture Group on the last
>>> call working draft: "Web Storage" [1].
>>>
>>> The HTML5 Application Cache (AppCache) [2] and Local Storage [1] both
>>> provide client-side storage that can be used by Web Applications.
>>> Although the interfaces are different (AppCache has an HTML interface
>>> while Local Storage has a JavaScript API), and they do seem to have 
>>> been
>>> designed with different use cases in mind, they provide somewhat 
>>> related
>>> facilities: both cause persistent storage for an application to be
>>> created, accessed and managed locally at the client. If, for 
>>> example, the
>>> keys in Local Storage were interpreted as URIs then Local Storage could
>>> be used to store manifest files and Web Applications could be 
>>> written to
>>> look transparently for manifest files in either the AppCache or in 
>>> Local
>>> Storage. One might also envision common facilities for querying the 
>>> size
>>> of or releasing all of the local storage for a given application.
>>>
>>> At the Offline Web Applications Workshop on Nov 5, 2011 [3] there was a
>>> request for a JavaScript API for AppCache and talk about coordinating
>>> AppCache and Local Storage.
>>>
>>> The TAG believes it is important to consider more carefully the 
>>> potential
>>> advantages of providing a single facility to cover the use cases, of
>>> perhaps modularizing the architecture so that some parts are shared, or
>>> if separate facilities are indeed the best design, providing common 
>>> data
>>> access and manipulation APIs. If further careful analysis suggests that
>>> no such integration is practical, then, at a minimum, each 
>>> specification
>>> should discuss how it is positioned with respect to the other.
>>>
>>> Noah Mendelsohn
>>> For the: W3C Technical Architecture Group
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-webstorage-20111025/
>>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/offline.html#appcache
>>> [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/web-apps-ws/
>>>
>>

Received on Wednesday, 30 November 2011 17:57:37 UTC