On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
> > On 8/12/10 6:29 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 19 May 2010, Patrick Mueller wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I've been playing with application cache for a while now, and found
> > > > the diagnostic
app.
>
>
> > UI effects
>
> ...should be in the CSS, not the script.
>
>
> > event handling
>
> That's pretty much all that should be in the UI-thread script, and it
> should just defer to the workers.
>
>
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, Mike Shaver wrote:
> >
> > The multiple server-side processes that end up involved over the course
> > of the user's interaction do need to share state with each other, and
> > preserving blocking semantics for accessing such state makes the
> > programs much simpler to reason about given today's programming
> > languages. Is that shared state not what the Global Script Object would
> > provide?
>
> Aren't global script objects supposed to be client-side? I don't see how
> they would help with server-side state.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
--
Adam de Boor
Google
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, Michael Kozakewich wrote:
>
> How many applications do we expect any one user to have open? I would
> imagine one would do fine on the Taskbar or in the Notification Area,
> like other programs, but a manager would be good if a user had a great
> deal of applications running at
re version, but in the
> absence of a compelling need for this, I'm going to skip adding this in
> this version.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--,'``.fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
--
Adam de Boor
Google
the difficulty with a named-section option is that the manifest generation
for an application would have to know which users use a particular machine,
which is pretty much a non-starter.
a
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> If the application code (HTML, JS, CSS) is all the sa
could the botnet concern be addressed by restricting network access from the
background page when there is no foreground page referencing it? e.g.
restrict it to requests to the same origin, no matter how those requests are
made? wouldn't let gmail precache linked images, when fetching new mail, bu
2009/7/28 Jonas Sicking
>
> The only concern I see with this is that it permanently forces all
> windows from the same domain to run in the same process. As things
> stand today, if the user opens two tabs (or windows) and navigates to
> the two different pages on www.example.com, then a browser
I guess in the double-AppCache model, where there's a generic cached
redirect page, one could make it so all user-specific accesses use a URL
with a user-specific prefix, so it can prefix-match against an entry in the
NETWORK section of the generic cached app manifest.
still, given how many apps on
