- From: duanyao <duanyao@ustc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2017 21:22:20 +0800
- To: Roger Hågensen <rh_whatwg@skuldwyrm.no>, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
在 2017年04月17日 20:43, Roger Hågensen 写道: > On 2017-04-17 13:53, duanyao wrote: >> For single page application, browsers restrict `foo.html`'s permission >> to `foo_files/` in the same parent directory. Note that it is already >> a common practice for browsers >> to save a page's resource to a `xxx_files/` directory; browsers just >> need to grant the permission >> of `xxx_files/`. > > I like that idea. But there is no need to treat single and multipage > differently is there? > > > d:\documents\test.html > d:\documents\test.html_files\page2.html > d:\documents\test.html_files\page3.html > > This can handle multipage fine as well. > Anything in the folder test.html_files is considered sandboxed under > test.html The problem is, what if users open `test_files\page2.html`or `test_files\page3.html`directly? Can they access `test_files\config.json`? This is to be solve by the "muli-page application" convention. By the way, the name of the directory is usually `foo_files`, not `foo.html_files`. > > This would allow a user (for a soundboard) to drop audio files into > d:\documents\test.html_files\sounds\jingle\ > d:\documents\test.html_files\sounds\loops\ > and so on. > > And if writing ability is added to javasript then write permission > could be given to those folders (so audio files could be created and > stored without "downloading" them each time) > > I just checked what naming Chrome does and it uses the page title. I > can't recall what the other browsers do. And adds _files to it. Chrome can be configured to ask for location when saving a page, then you can name it as you will. The "xxx_files" convention was introduced by IE or Netscape long ago, and other browsers just follow it. > > So granting read/write/listing permissions for the html file to that > folder and it's subfolders would certainly make single page offline > apps possible. Yeah, I think it is unlike harmful to allow write/listing permission as well. > > I have not tested how editing/adding to this folder affect things, > deleting the html file also deletes the folder (at least on Windows > 10, and I seem to recall on Windows 7 as well). There is no magic link between `foo.html` and `foo_files/`, this is just a trick of Windows Explorer. You can change things by hand in that directory as you will. > I'm not sure if a offline app needs the folder linked to the html file > or not. > A web developer might create the folder manually in which case there > will be no link. And if zipped and moved to a different > system/downloaded by users then any such html and folder linking will > be lost as well. > > Maybe instead of d:\documents\test.html_files\ > d:\documents\test.html_data\ could be used? > This would also distinguish it from the current user saved webpages. > > >
Received on Monday, 17 April 2017 13:23:10 UTC