On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Benjamin Francis <[email protected]> wrote: > On 7 July 2015 at 07:21, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Generally speaking, CDNs use a new URL any time you want to change the >> file contents. > > > Alex Russell claims this impression is outdated, that the vast majority of > modern CDNs do allow for stable URLs. How can we get some objective data on > this? > >> Very few developers will think about how to update the icon when they >> originally deploy the website. That won't be something that they think >> about until it actually comes time to update the branding, which often >> won't be long after they first deploy. > > That is probably true. > >> > It says that the user agent may >> > "periodically check if the contents of a manifest has been modified >> > (e.g., >> > by honoring HTTP cache directives associated with the manifest or by >> > checking for updates after the web application has been launched)". >> >> Does any other implementation actually do that? > > No not as far as I know, it's still untested. Chrome doesn't currently > implement the updating, though I understand they plan to in the future. I'm > trying to find out about Opera.
Given this, and given that I don't actually see a downside to re-downloading the HTML page again, I definitely think that that's what we should do. At the very least I'd like to see solid data on that CDNs most of the time support updating the manifest in-place, and that other browsers have near-term plans on implementing updates by re-pinging the manifest URL. Also keep in mind that for websites that don't use manifests, but instead use meta tags, we'll have to re-download the HTML. / Jonas _______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
