- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 20:59:23 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote: > > The bugzilla scenario is a good one. Someone wants to offline-enable > bugzilla. They could rewrite bugzilla to use fragment identifiers > instead of querystrings, but then bug shortcuts on the web would not > work with the offline-enabled application. They couldn't really cache > all possible pages (there are lots of bugs, and that would be really > inefficient). I suppose you could have each bug page be a separate > application, and cache each one as it is viewed online, but this is > really wasteful, and more importantly, bug shortcuts won't work offline > unless you have previously visited them. Ok, but what are you proposing to _solve_ this? There's no difference between the following two models as I see it: * Download an HTML page for each bug * Download a single page to generate the bug pages plus one data page per bug ...except that the former will mean there's no difference between online and offline, and the latter will mean there _is_ a difference between online and offline, which will bring in its associated sets of bugs. I don't understand how you would expect the client-side server idea (the parsing of server-side URIs on the client) to work. It would be helpful to see actual sample code, maybe. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 13 September 2007 13:59:23 UTC