Re: ISSUE-32: explain dynamic content better

Shawn,

I appreciate the distinction you're making, but can the user agent  
know this?

What the server does with a request seems outside the scope of  
context that a user agent can provide, no?  I mean, we could guess,  
based on the presence of CGI params, for instance, that a page was  
probably "Foo" content - but with mod_rewrite we'd be deceived, and a  
cookie might be all it takes to change server-generated content anyhow.

I think the determination that a page is, for lack of a better term,  
"live" - subject to change post-rendering, "Bar" content - is a piece  
of context that user agents can determine, and which they may or may  
not want to present to users, hence the proposal.  But I think it  
would be a horse of a different colour to ask user agents to guess at  
the conditions that shaped the server-returned page.

Cheers,

J

---
Johnathan Nightingale
Human Shield
johnath@mozilla.com



On 16-May-07, at 8:09 AM, Shawn Duffy wrote:

>
> I assume for dynamic content we're leaving out pages generated "on the
> fly"?  This seems slightly confusing to me.  If a page is built on the
> fly and served to me, I don't many people who would consider that
> "static content" but, since it has a completion point, we're  
> defining it
> as such.
>
> I suppose we can define it how every we like, but it seems a tad
> confusing and counterintuitive.  It almost seems like three categories
> might be needed.  Something like:
>
> Static content - Content containing only markup that is identical for
> every user.
> "Foo" content - Content generated by the web server at the time of
> request by the client.
> "Bar" content - Content that continually changes based on client  
> actions
> and information after initial delivery by the web server.
>
> Or something like that.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Shawn
>
> Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:
>>
>> To help folks who still may not get it, would add to this proposal (a
>> variant of) the last line of mine, making it:
>>
>> "The rendering of a web page composed of only static content has a
>> completion point, after which the rendered view remains constant  
>> until
>> the user chooses to navigate to another web page. Dynamic content is
>> anything that changes this interaction or is given additional  
>> access to
>> user agent functions. Java and javascript are two current examples."
>>
>>           Mez
>>
>> Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
>> Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect
>>
>>
>>
>> *"Close, Tyler J." <tyler.close@hp.com>*
>> Sent by: public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
>>
>> 05/09/2007 08:39 PM
>>
>> 	
>> To
>> 	<public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
>> cc
>> 	
>> Subject
>> 	RE: ISSUE-32: explain dynamic content better
>>
>>
>> 	
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The text proposed by ISSUE-32 is:
>> Dynamic content is whatever the user aagent treats as code, as  
>> opposed to
>> data. Java and javascript are the two cannonical examples.
>> The difference between code and data is a famously slippery  
>> distinction
>> in computer science. I think we need some other way of distinguishing
>> dynamic content. I believe the important distinction is the  
>> difference
>> in authority between a static web page and a dynamic web page. For
>> example, a static web page cannot: change the rendered view after
>> loading has completed; read the system clock; schedule timeouts;
>> navigate the browser to a specified URL; navigate backwards or  
>> forwards
>> in the browser history; pop a dialog box; open a new browser window;
>> close a browser window; etc. Some dynamic content has even greater
>> authority; for example, an ActiveX control has full authority over  
>> the
>> user's computer.
>>
>> I suggest we clarify what we mean by dynamic content with:
>>
>> "The rendering of a web page composed of only static content has a
>> completion point, after which the rendered view remains constant  
>> until
>> the user chooses to navigate to another web page. Dynamic content is
>> anything that changes this interaction or is given additional  
>> access to
>> user agent functions."
>>
>> Tyler
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ---
>> *From:* public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Mary Ellen  
>> Zurko*
>> Sent:* Wednesday, May 09, 2007 4:39 PM*
>> To:* public-wsc-wg@w3.org*
>> Subject:* Re: ISSUE-32: explain dynamic content better
>>
>>
>> I declare concensus. The editors will make the change (modulo the  
>> typo)
>> and close the issue.
>>
>>          Mez
>>
>> Mary Ellen Zurko, STSM, IBM Lotus CTO Office       (t/l 333-6389)
>> Lotus/WPLC Security Strategy and Patent Innovation Architect
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> shawn duffy - shawn.duffy@corp.aol.com
> senior technical security engineer | aol it security
> 703.265.8273 | AIM: ShawnDuffy1
> https://open-itsec.office.aol.com/
> https://www.itsec.aol.com/
>

Received on Thursday, 17 May 2007 19:13:10 UTC