- From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 17:59:14 +0300
People should probably consider reading the Web Apps Widgets working group archives (they're public) about widget packaging. There are long discussions about zip and gzip, etc. http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#zip-archive Especially http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#character-sets covers character sets. As for zip streaming / gzip streaming... Officially Zip technically has ways to construct archives which are painful. In practice I don't think that's a real problem (beyond that user agents would need to ensure to fail any packages which abuse those features). People tend to come late to the game and say "why didn't you use gzip". The general short answer is that gzip doesn't cover a file container format at all, and browsers tend to already support zip. So the cost of using zip is negligible whereas adding something else which is messy (e.g. tar, star, pax) is painful. And if you think that tar is well specified, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2010 07:59:14 UTC