On Oct 12, 2007 9:39 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 11, 2007, at 6:47 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> On Oct 12, 2007 12:53 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The problem with isLocallyAvailable() -- as noted by Maciej on IRC -- is
> > mostly one of race c
On Oct 12, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
The race-free approach would be to provide APIs to load resources
only
from the cache and to error out immediately if the the request
can't be
served locally.
That's what the offline caching
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> The race-free approach would be to provide APIs to load resources only
> from the cache and to error out immediately if the the request can't be
> served locally.
That's what the offline caching system does right now for any URI not on
the whit
On Oct 11, 2007, at 6:47 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007 12:53 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem with isLocallyAvailable() -- as noted by Maciej on IRC
-- is
mostly one of race conditions. What if the resource was removed in
between
you asking for it and u
On Oct 12, 2007 12:53 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with isLocallyAvailable() -- as noted by Maciej on IRC -- is
> mostly one of race conditions. What if the resource was removed in between
> you asking for it and using it? Or added?
>
In the contexts for which it was r
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> >
> > > -- Several Web app authors have asked for the ability to test
> > > whether a resource is cached, for their online apps. For example,
> > > when you're zooming in and out of a map, the application could
> > > choose which tile(s) to use for
On 10/10/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> -- Several Web app authors have asked for the ability to test whether a
> > resource is cached, for their online apps. For example, when you're
> > zooming in and out of a map, the application c
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
>
> In order to offline-enable bugzilla, you would first need to turn it
> into an ajax-style application. Where you separate the UI template from
> the data.
>
> If you still want to keep the old URLs working, this basically means
> capturing (and per
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> >
> > Could multi-page apps be addressed by letting applications specify
> > that other applications should be cached (using a similar api to the
> > one that lets applications programatically cache resources)?
>
> I don't think that works very we
Ooops
On 9/25/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2007, at 10:45 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> So I suspect that, much like synchronous XMLHttpRequest, synchronous file
> reads will lead to excessive UI lockups in bad circumstances unanticipated
> by the app author.
PROTECTED]
Cc: Aaron Boodman; Dave Camp; Maciej Stachowiak; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Křištof
Želechovski; Ian Hickson
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Offline Web Apps
Surely it would be possible for the browser to transparently store
the encoding in the event that none was defined by the developer?
ištof Želechovski; Dave Camp; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ian Hickson; Aaron
Boodman
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Offline Web Apps
On 9/23/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, I'm not sure how a web app can be expected to know the encoding
of a text file on disk.
The same way that an
On Sep 25, 2007, at 8:55 AM, Dave Camp wrote:
On 9/25/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The OS and the UA can often make a better guess, so I think the
option to
let the UA decide the encoding should at least be provided. Here
are some
sources of info that the UA has but the
On 9/25/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The OS and the UA can often make a better guess, so I think the option to
> let the UA decide the encoding should at least be provided. Here are some
> sources of info that the UA has but the web app doesn't (at least without
> doing a sep
On Sep 24, 2007, at 10:45 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
On 9/23/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Obviously, if the way to get the contents as text requires providing
the encoding, then it has to be a method. My comment was about the no-
argument methods. But you have a point that
On 24/09/2007, at 10:45 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
For small files, synchronous reading is OK. Perhaps there should be
a separate whiz-bang asynchronous API ... it could support partial
reads too.
I would be concerned about this -- for many people async APIs seem
scary compared to sy
On 9/23/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Obviously, if the way to get the contents as text requires providing
> the encoding, then it has to be a method. My comment was about the no-
> argument methods. But you have a point that reading from disk is not a
> simple get operation.
27;Dave Camp'
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Offline Web Apps
On Sep 22, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Křištof Želechovski wrote:
> An arbitrary file is a sequence of bytes and it is up to the
> application how
> these bytes are interpreted as characters.
> Moreover, a text file conceptually does n
On Sep 22, 2007, at 8:48 AM, Křištof Želechovski wrote:
I do not share your reservations. The file contents does not
constitute its
property and, unlike properties, much work is actually needed to
extract it.
Therefore the name chosen seems very appropriate.
How is the character encoding
, September 22, 2007 1:07 AM
To: Dave Camp
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Ian Hickson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Aaron Boodman
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Offline Web Apps
On Sep 21, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Dave Camp wrote:
> On 9/21/07, Robert O'Callahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Actually we have an
On 9/21/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> DOMString getAsBinary() isn't actually self-explanatory to me. How do
> you encode binary data as a UTF-16 string? I can think of at least two
> vaguely obvious ways (each code point is a byte, or each code point is
> a 16-bit chunk of the
On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 01:07:23 +0200, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It would be nice if this was designed to handle the possibility of
multiple file selection (which I think Web Forms 2 enables).
It does actually. There's a fileList attribute on HTMLInputElement that
returns a
On Sep 21, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Dave Camp wrote:
On 9/21/07, Robert O'Callahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually we have an experimental API for this now. See here:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/dom/public/idl/html/nsIDOMNSHTMLInputElement.idl#55
http://mxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/sour
On 9/21/07, Robert O'Callahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually we have an experimental API for this now. See here:
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/dom/public/idl/html/nsIDOMNSHTMLInputElement.idl#55
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/content/base/public/nsIDOMFileList.idl
> ht
I haven't had time to study Ian's proposal properly yet, sorry. But some
easy comments:
On 9/20/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Upgrader:
> > Create a hidden browsing context.
> > Load the upgrader in it.
>
> I don't like this whole upgrader idea. Parsing HTML and CSS and
>
On 9/20/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) Many offline web apps will let you want to make changes, including
> not just changing existing items, but also creating new items. To do
> this, at minimum there needs to be an API to inject a new resource
> into the offline cache prog
On Sep 19, 2007 11:23 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given point #1, I think this should be based on textual prefix
> matching of the URI, not just dropping the query (the scheme and
> authority sections should be treated specially, of course, it should
> not be allowed to have
My commentary below.
Overall, I think the basic model is fairly sound. But I do think some
improvements could be made.
On Sep 6, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
Ok, new proposal:
There's a concept of an application cache. An application cache is a
group
of resources, the group bein
On Sep 13, 2007, at 3:59 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
Maybe you were asking how you could keep querystring-based urls in
the
offline version of Bugzilla?
There isn't an "offline version". There's just one version, it just
happens to support being online
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Mark Baker wrote:
>
> +1
Just for the record, there's no need to actually post to this list just to
say that you agree. I take into account all comments and base the edits to
the spec only on the merit of the arguments, not their popularity.
You can see which e-mails I've t
On Sep 13, 2007 3:59 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We're talking about Bugzilla here. There's a LOT of data to send per bug.
> All the metadata, all the comments, the entire changelog, it adds up to
> probably not much less than the actual page as generated by the server.
In order t
On 9/13/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> By doing this we're
basically saying that the query string never gets sent
> to the server anymore. That seems like a huge violation of the URI
> semantics.
>
> I think the problem here isn't necessarily just the query parameters
> though. The pro
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
> >
> > Ok, but what are you proposing to _solve_ this? There's no difference
> > between the following two models as I see it:
> >
> > * Download an HTML page for each bug
> >
> > * Download a single page to generate the bug pages plus one data
> >
On Sep 13, 2007 1:59 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, but what are you proposing to _solve_ this? There's no difference
> between the following two models as I see it:
>
> * Download an HTML page for each bug
>
> * Download a single page to generate the bug pages plus one data
>
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
>
> The bugzilla scenario is a good one. Someone wants to offline-enable
> bugzilla. They could rewrite bugzilla to use fragment identifiers
> instead of querystrings, but then bug shortcuts on the web would not
> work with the offline-enabled applicati
On Sep 6, 2007 5:46 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We provide an API that can add files to the cache, and that can be queried
> to determine if we are in upgrader mode or not, and that can swap in a
> new cache without reloading the page, during the 'upgrading' event.
Given this, and
On 9/13/07, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You seem to have missed what I pointed out earlier:
> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#pushstate This allows
> applications to make distinct URIs while keeping all the other benefits.
Yes, it does, and I apologize I misse
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:21:21 +0200, Dimitri Glazkov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would've loved it if Google Reader had a distinct URL for each click
I make on the page, and I am sure Google Reader devs would've loved it
too. Except they also would've loved not having to worry about the
browser/
The following has a rant flavor to it, but I am hoping you'll find it
helpful in the thought process.
Distinct, server-reaching URLs (no fragment identifiers) for each page
in an web application are a _good_thing_. Packing the whole
application into one document and managing history with id hashes
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:30:02 +0200, Aaron Boodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 13, 2007 4:44 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I feel like me and the other querystringers are missing some critical
detail that would make omitting querystring support work. So here is
how I see i
On 9/13/07, Aaron Boodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bugzilla scenario is a good one. Someone wants to offline-enable
> bugzilla. They could rewrite bugzilla to use fragment identifiers
> instead of querystrings, but then bug shortcuts on the web would not
> work with the offline-enabled appl
On Sep 13, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
They could rewrite bugzilla to use fragment identifiers instead of
querystrings, but then bug shortcuts on the web would not work with
the offline-enabled application.
If you're designing a new application, even one that works both
online
On Sep 13, 2007 4:44 AM, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the query parameter use case. If you have a web
> page "foo.cgi?page=x" wouldn't that page also be simply the offline page?
> What exactly is the scenario in some more detail?
I feel like me and the o
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:22:59 +0200, Robert O'Callahan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/11/07, Dimitri Glazkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since, AFAIK, the fragment identifier is not passed onto the server by
the UA, I can't see how an application could be designed with proper
noscript degradatio
On 9/11/07, Dimitri Glazkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Since, AFAIK, the fragment identifier is not passed onto the server by
> the UA, I can't see how an application could be designed with proper
> noscript degradation and reliance frament ids for query communication.
>
> Besides, using query
In fact, interrogating such a form should provide enough information
to the UA on what query parameters are and even some of the values of
these parameters.
On 9/10/07, Dimitri Glazkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since, AFAIK, the fragment identifier is not passed onto the server by
> the UA, I c
Since, AFAIK, the fragment identifier is not passed onto the server by
the UA, I can't see how an application could be designed with proper
noscript degradation and reliance frament ids for query communication.
Besides, using query parameters is much more natural for HTML: forms
with method=get ar
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
> On Sep 10, 2007 2:21 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I still don't understand how you see this working using the same
> > codebase both online and offline. The model I'm proposing basically
> > relies on the app being an offline app,
On Sep 10, 2007 2:21 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still don't understand how you see this working using the same codebase
> both online and offline. The model I'm proposing basically relies on the
> app being an offline app, except that while you're online the offline app
> is tal
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> On 9/10/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Why wouldn't you just offline-cache the
> >https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389437
> > ...file?
>
> I might be storing its data in a local database so I can make changes to
>
On 9/10/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Why wouldn't you just offline-cache the
>https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389437
> ...file?
I might be storing its data in a local database so I can make changes to it
locally while I'm offline.
Rob
--
"Two men owed money to
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> Here's a real-life example:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389437#c3
> Now if we refit Bugzilla for offline support, this will become something
> like
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi#id=389437,c3
> If we want the same UR
On 9/10/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> > That's an option, but then you can't use the fragment identifier for its
> > scroll-to behaviour when you use it to pass parameters.
>
> You can just pass the scroll position as one of the param
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> That's an option, but then you can't use the fragment identifier for its
> scroll-to behaviour when you use it to pass parameters.
You can just pass the scroll position as one of the parameters.
> Also, when retrofitting an existing app, this r
On 9/8/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Given that you'd have to radically rewrite the app anyway to use an
> offline database instead of just using HTTP, why would we reuse the URI
> query syntax feature? It seems like it'd be better (from a consistency
> with existing specs point of
On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>
> Yes. Suppose Bugzilla had offline support. The Bugzilla UI has a bunch
> of links it with with different query parameters (e.g., bug numbers).
> Bugzilla running offline could take those parameters and use them to
> look up a local database and p
On 8/24/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Do we really need a way to ignore the query parameters when
>fetching and serving from cache when offline? (The idea below assumes
>not. I don't really understand the use case if the answer is yes.)
Yes. Suppose Bugzilla had offline
Erm. Right.
:DG<
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>
> Still reading through... am I right assuming that the shortest attribute
> value would be "#", i.e. , pointing to itself?
The shortest value would be "", pointing to itself.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.f
Still reading through... am I right assuming that the shortest
attribute value would be "#", i.e. , pointing to
itself?
:DG<
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> I think it's easy to extend Ian's idea in a way that keeps it really
> simple for the simple case, but that works better for the multi-page
> case or other complex cases where pages load some resources dynamically.
>
>
>
> The manifest file wo
Ian Hickson wrote:
Comments?
As useful as this would be, I can't help thinking that:
1. It's a huge time sink that will delay the rest of the spec.
2. We simply don't know enough at this point in time to reliably
standardize something like this.
Keep in mind that most of what this group is
Intuitively, I think I agree with Maciej. Manifest is not as elegant
as "participation by association" approach, but it allows for better
packaging an application. I am thinking about scripts/stylesheets that
are typically a limited set of resources, reused throughout an
application.
I also don't
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Hickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Offline Web Apps
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
There are two distinct types of applicat
On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:56 PM, Aaron Boodman wrote:
On Aug 23, 2007 8:18 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
I haven't read over the details but there seems to be an obvious
showstopper problem: this won't work for web applications that
co
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>
> There are two distinct types of applications (in context of this topic)
>
> 1) Online web applications. 2) Occasionally connected web applications (OCWA).
>
> These two groups differ significantly in their design.
> So what exactly you are trying
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Hickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 6:42 PM
Subject: Offline Web Apps
(If you reply, please only include one of the mailing lists in your
reply. Thanks.)
So I read through a
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Aaron Boodman wrote:
>
> The single-page model has other nice advantages. For example, there's
> never any confusion about which cache should serve a resource. It's the
> one that's associated with the application which the resource is
> contained in.
Indeed.
> Could mult
On Aug 23, 2007 8:18 PM, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> >
> > I haven't read over the details but there seems to be an obvious
> > showstopper problem: this won't work for web applications that consist
> > of more than one page.
>
> Indeed,
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
> I haven't read over the details but there seems to be an obvious
> showstopper problem: this won't work for web applications that consist
> of more than one page.
Indeed, that was called out as a potential issue. But is that really a
problem? I
On Aug 23, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
IDEA
Ok so here's my idea based on the existing ideas, the comments on
those
ideas, and so forth. One of my main goals was keeping everything as
simple
as possible.
My proposal is that we add a new attribute to the element,
which
flags
(If you reply, please only include one of the mailing lists in your
reply. Thanks.)
So I read through all the offline Web app discussions:
http://www.whatwg.org/issues/#filesystem
http://code.google.com/apis/gears/api_localserver.html
http://www.campd.org/stuff/Offline%20Cache.html
.
72 matches
Mail list logo
