W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2007

[whatwg] Offline Web Apps

From: Dimitri Glazkov <dimitri.glazkov@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:59:44 -0500
Message-ID: <fb15ac210708241659m1e009a38l11fdab976687dbd9@mail.gmail.com>
Intuitively, I think I agree with Maciej. Manifest is not as elegant
as "participation by association" approach, but it allows for better
packaging an application. I am thinking about scripts/stylesheets that
are typically a limited set of resources, reused throughout an
application.

I also don't yet understand why Ian wants to store multiple versions
of resource representations, if same representation is used by
multiple apps.  What is the motivation here?

... and how would one make an app like Twitter or Facebook available
offline? Perhaps a markup attribute is not a good idea in this case,
where every profile page is potentially an application. I am thinking
that only _your_ profile page is an offline app. Right?

On 8/24/07, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:56 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
>
> > On Aug 23, 2007 8:18 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I haven't read over the details but there seems to be an obvious
> >>> showstopper problem: this won't work for web applications that
> >>> consist
> >>> of more than one page.
> >>
> >> Indeed, that was called out as a potential issue. But is that
> >> really a
> >> problem? It's easy to work around (e.g. with iframe)s if you really
> >> must
> >> have multiple "top-level" pages, but aren't web apps moving to a
> >> one-page
> >> model anyway?
> >>
> >> The problem gets significantly more complicated with multiple top-
> >> level
> >> pages all taking part in the same conceptual application.
> >
> > The single-page model has other nice advantages. For example, there's
> > never any confusion about which cache should serve a resource. It's
> > the one that's associated with the application which the resource is
> > contained in.
> >
> > Could multi-page apps be addressed by letting applications specify
> > that other applications should be cached (using a similar api to the
> > one that lets applications programatically cache resources)?
>
> I don't think that works very well - you'd have to parse all the HTML,
> CSS and scripts associated with those other pages just to do the
> caching. That's a huge cost compared to just downloading the
> resources. Consider web apps like flickr and upcoming which consist of
> many many pages. Obviously these specific examples can't cache all of
> their pages offline but they may well want to cache a significant
> subset that is interesting to the user.
>
> I think it's easy to extend Ian's idea in a way that keeps it really
> simple for the simple case, but that works better for the multi-page
> case or other complex cases where pages load some resources dynamically.
>
> <html application="manifest-file">
>
> The manifest file would indicate all resources used by the web app,
> including other pages, and other resources that may be loaded by the
> current page but normally would not be at startup (another problem
> with Ian's proposal IMO). Multiple pages that refer to the same
> manifest are considered part of the same web app and share the same
> cache. If you give an empty value for the application attribute, then
> the implicit thing that Ian describes happens - the resources that the
> page actually loads are the ones cached.
>
> My thoughts on this aren't fully fleshed out, but Ian said he wants to
> start editing the spec right away so I wanted to give this minimal
> feedback before he writes up something in detail that I would strongly
> object to.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 24 August 2007 16:59:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:36 UTC