It got ripped out because Mozilla has refused to implement. An old version
is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/webstorage/
2009/7/29 Drew Wilson <atwil...@chromium.org>
> I recall that the SQL Storage API allows developers to declare up front how
> much quota they want. Perhaps you should ask Hixie if we want to make this
> an option for local storage as well?
> BTW, I can't find the HTML5 sql storage spec anymore - google is totally
> failing me. Anyone have a link?
>
> -atw
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jeremy Orlow <jor...@chromium.org>wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Linus Upson <li...@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm coming to the opinion that we should leverage the
>>> install mechanism of the extension system for apps that need
>>> special permissions, increased quotas, expanded lifetimes, etc. The
>>> extension can be almost vacuous, and in our extension world exceptionally
>>> lightweight. It only needs to make the special capability available to the
>>> page.
>>> As Maciej brought up on the whatwg list, the extension system gives us
>>> multiple affirmative steps,
>>> vetting, reputation and revocation. It also gives us a UI access point. All
>>> of these are important for controlling apps that aren't safe and stateless.
>>>
>>
>> I like this approach.
>>
>> So the only loose end is this: what should we do (if anything) about
>> malicious apps using thousands of sub-domains (which are each their own
>> origin, and thus get their own 5mb) to fill up your machine. As far as I
>> know, no other browser deals with this and it hasn't ever been a problem
>> (...yet), so I guess we can just ignore it for the time being?
>>
>> J
>>
>> >>
>>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
