W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2009

[whatwg] Caching offline Web applications

From: Michael Nordman <michaeln@google.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:19:23 -0800
Message-ID: <fa2eab050901221819m37bd8f75yedf329df5062287d@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Michael Nordman wrote:
> >
> > Fwi, this piece of functionality may warrant some actual consideration.
> > I think this would add very little complexity to the spec and
> > implementations, but would add a great deal of value. Big bang for
> > little buck.
> >
> > Many applications that use Gears depend on the intercept ability in some
> > central fashion. Lets just take an example from Google Docs use of
> > Gears. There are two intercept entries for urls of the form /Doc? and
> > /View?. Doc provides an editable interface. View provides a read-only
> > view. The document id is provided to these pages as a query parameter.
> > Upon loading, these cached pages examine the query params and retrieve
> > the appropiate document data from the an SQL database, and populate the
> > DOM accordingly. This is a fairly common use case from what I've seen.
> >
> > I think the inclusion of a feature along these lines would greatly help
> > existing Gears users migrate to this new system.
>
> There are several ways we could solve this problem, and I'm not sure we've
> yet really come up with the best solution. Concerns have been raised both
> about solutions like the above and about the dynamic entries feature. Now
> that I've removed the dynamic entries feature, it will be easier to add a
> feature such as the above once we have more implementation experience and
> authoring experience.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>


Thnx for the response Ian, much better than months of thundering
silence. I'm not yet sure we've come up with solutions that will stand the
test of time and merit inclusion in a spec either. Having said that, what is
spec'd for AppCache does hang together fairly well. What's there is
necessary and useful, but alas... insufficient.
Its interesting to see how this functionality has gotten stripped down to
the bone, and I'm looking forward to see how it gets built back up to
something that is of broader practical use. I seriously doubt if gears
customers could actually drop gears and use the HTML5 system as spec'd
instead.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090122/8e288082/attachment.htm>
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2009 18:19:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:09 UTC