- From: John Kemp <john@jkemp.net>
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:56:18 -0500
- To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Jeni, On Mar 10, 2011, at 3:59 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote: > Noah, > > On 10 Mar 2011, at 01:02, Noah Mendelsohn wrote: >> Not where I'm going at all. I want a syntax that can be interpreted transparently, server and client, with good Javascript control over when you do or don't want server interaction. > > Isn't that what the HTML5 history API provides? How do you pass around that hunk of Javascript which identifies a particular state? Do you want to? > What doesn't it do that you think we need? I hear some people want to pass client state around, and treat in general a resource/representation/document as a partial computation or "continuation". I don't think you can do that with HTML5 history alone. And currently, URIs aren't generally treated in such a way as to allow this. There isn't a generally-accepted way of writing a URI that says "the state of a computation at X", although people are makign attempts to use them roughly-speaking in this way. Do we want URIs to be used this way? If so, how should they be formed? Regards, - John > > Jeni > -- > Jeni Tennison > http://www.jenitennison.com > >
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2011 13:56:56 UTC