- From: Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:52:03 -0700
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Jim Williams <jgwilliams at mindspring.com> wrote: > I tried out local storage, used it to save the contents of a > content-editable passage.? It worked great in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and > MSIE.? Only one problem:? Every time I switched browsers, I had to start > over with the original unedited passage.? So I have two requests. > > 1.? I would like the browser vendors to all use the same implementation of > localStorage, as this will greatly facilitate browser-independent viewing > experiences.? As it stands, I have no idea how to maintain continuity if a > user viewing my page in one browser switches to another browser. None. If you need persistent cross-browser state, on a page that you control, why not just store it server-side? Then it also works from multiple computers, which even your proposed modifications to localStorage won't get you. > 2.? Kindly extend the specification so that other applications can make > constructive use of localStorage.? Specifically, (a) establish a convention > for associating keys with particular files (e.g., by prepending the file's > path name to the key), and (b) allowing other applications to treat the file > and its associated local storage as a single entity.? Doing this would allow > a user to e-mail the current state of a file to a friend, so that both will > have the same view of the file.? This ability to share "current" views of a > file is useful for maintaining HTML's role as a communications vehicle. > > Jim Williams
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 09:52:03 UTC