Hi Jonas, I too like the subset relationship between UMP and CORS and hope to retain it. AFAIK, the only issue here is whether or not the user-agent can follow a non-uniform redirect. There are two ways to resolve this: UMP forbids following or CORS enables following. Is there any chance of the latter?
--Tyler On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote: > I support this. > > For the record: I have admittedly not been following the recent > discussions, but some of it has worried me a bit. I liked how UMP was > originally a subset of CORS, in that it gave some amount of > compatibility between the two models. In particular the ability for a > UMP client to talk to a CORS server seems like a win for both specs. I > also believe it makes switching between the two models slightly > easier, which again I think is a win for all involved parties. > > If that is no longer the case, I hope that we'll end up back there. > > In any case, whatever the state is I support the publication of this > FPWD. And please do keep technical discussions in the existing threads > (and new ones of course). I just wanted to raise some technical > concerns so that no one misunderstood what my support for the FPWD > meant. > > / Jonas > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Arthur Barstow <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to publish the First Public Working Draft >> (FPWD) of the Uniform Messaging Policy (UMP) spec, latest Editor's Draft at: >> >> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/ >> >> This CfC satisfies the group's requirement to "record the group's decision >> to request advancement". >> >> By publishing this FPWD, the group sends a signal to the community to begin >> reviewing the document. The FPWD reflects where the group is on this spec at >> the time of publication; it does not necessarily mean there is consensus on >> the spec's contents. >> >> As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged and >> silence will be assumed to be assent. >> >> The deadline for comments is January 19. >> >> -Art Barstow >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: ext Tyler Close <[email protected]> >>> Date: January 7, 2010 8:21:10 PM EST >>> To: public-webapps <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [UMP] A declarative version of "Uniform Messaging Policy" >>> Archived-At: >>> <http://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected]> >>> >>> I've updated the UMP spec to use a declarative style and moved the >>> algorithmic specification to a non-normative appendix. Hopefully this >>> organization will appeal to fans of either style. See: >>> >>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/UMP/ >>> >>> I'm hoping to move UMP forward to FPWD as soon as possible. Please let >>> me know if there is anything I need to do to expedite this process. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> --Tyler >> >> >> > > -- "Waterken News: Capability security on the Web" http://waterken.sourceforge.net/recent.html
