[whatwg] Web Storage: apparent contradiction in spec

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Jeremy Orlow<jorlow at chromium.org> wrote:
> Ok, well I guess we should go ahead and have this discussion now. ?:-) ?Does
> anyone outside of Apple and Google have an opinion on the matter (since I
> think it's pretty clear where we both stand).

FWIW, I tend to agree more with the Apple argument :). I agree that
the multiple malicious subdomains thing is unfortunate. Maybe the
quotas should be per eTLD instead of -- or in addition to --
per-origin? Malicious developers could then use multiple eTLDs, but at
that point there is a real cost.

Extensions are an example of an application that is less cloud-based.
It would be unfortunate and weird for extension developers to have to
worry about their storage getting tossed because the UA is running out
of disk space.

It seems more like if that happens the UA should direct the user to UI
to free up some storage. If quotas were enforced at the eTLD level,
wouldn't this be really rare?

- a

Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2009 15:19:30 UTC