Call for Contributors: TAG's Web App Storage work [Was: Re: TAG Comment on Web Storage]
Hi All, Off-list, Ashok and I talked about his comments and TAG's Web Application Storage work [1]. Ashok would welcome WebApps' participation in that work. Thus, for the WebApps group - this is call for contributors. If you are interested in contributing to this area, please respond to this e-mail (off-list responses are fine too). -Art Barstow [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage On 11/21/11 2:14 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote: The idea is not to remove APIs. We have several client-side storage facilities that cover different but overlapping usecases. Can we step back and look at what we have and come up, perhaps, with a smaller set of facilities and better coordinated APIs. If this is important to the TAG, it seems like you should add that task to the Web Application Storage work the TAG intends to do. Agreed? -AB [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage
Re: Call for Contributors: TAG's Web App Storage work [Was: Re: TAG Comment on Web Storage]
What effect will this effort have on the implementations? Are they listening? Cheers, On 23/11/2011, at 11:49 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi All, Off-list, Ashok and I talked about his comments and TAG's Web Application Storage work [1]. Ashok would welcome WebApps' participation in that work. Thus, for the WebApps group - this is call for contributors. If you are interested in contributing to this area, please respond to this e-mail (off-list responses are fine too). -Art Barstow [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage On 11/21/11 2:14 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote: The idea is not to remove APIs. We have several client-side storage facilities that cover different but overlapping usecases. Can we step back and look at what we have and come up, perhaps, with a smaller set of facilities and better coordinated APIs. If this is important to the TAG, it seems like you should add that task to the Web Application Storage work the TAG intends to do. Agreed? -AB [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Re: Call for Contributors: TAG's Web App Storage work [Was: Re: TAG Comment on Web Storage]
Hi Mark: The idea is to involve some of those folks in this effort. All the best, Ashok On 11/23/2011 2:49 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: What effect will this effort have on the implementations? Are they listening? Cheers, On 23/11/2011, at 11:49 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi All, Off-list, Ashok and I talked about his comments and TAG's Web Application Storage work [1]. Ashok would welcome WebApps' participation in that work. Thus, for the WebApps group - this is call for contributors. If you are interested in contributing to this area, please respond to this e-mail (off-list responses are fine too). -Art Barstow [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage On 11/21/11 2:14 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote: The idea is not to remove APIs. We have several client-side storage facilities that cover different but overlapping usecases. Can we step back and look at what we have and come up, perhaps, with a smaller set of facilities and better coordinated APIs. If this is important to the TAG, it seems like you should add that task to the Web Application Storage work the TAG intends to do. Agreed? -AB [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Re: Call for Contributors: TAG's Web App Storage work [Was: Re: TAG Comment on Web Storage]
I should also clarify that the TAG itself has not at this point reached consensus on the goals or scope for any work we might do in the storage area, though we have given Ashok an action to investigate what, if anything, might be useful. One possible direction would be for the TAG to do what it has done in some other areas, which is to clarify architectural principles relating to client-side storage in general. E.g., the TAG might discuss tradeoffs and good practice relating to cases in which the information stored locally is also a representation of a resource available on the network (thing of an architecture in which e-mails can be accessed via URI from an online Web server, or can be stored locally for offline access.) Such consideration by the TAG might well not suggest any changes to plans for APIs, but might just suggest good practice for use by applications. Conversely, the TAG might decide to become involved in other questions, such as those that might follow from our recent last call comment [1] regarding the relationship between appcache and Web Storage. In any case, except for the decision to make that one last-call comment, the TAG has not reached consensus as to what work we might do relating to client-side storage. Noah Mendelsohn TAG co-chair [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2011Nov/0070.html On 11/23/2011 6:09 PM, ashok malhotra wrote: Hi Mark: The idea is to involve some of those folks in this effort. All the best, Ashok On 11/23/2011 2:49 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote: What effect will this effort have on the implementations? Are they listening? Cheers, On 23/11/2011, at 11:49 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote: Hi All, Off-list, Ashok and I talked about his comments and TAG's Web Application Storage work [1]. Ashok would welcome WebApps' participation in that work. Thus, for the WebApps group - this is call for contributors. If you are interested in contributing to this area, please respond to this e-mail (off-list responses are fine too). -Art Barstow [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage On 11/21/11 2:14 PM, ext Arthur Barstow wrote: On 11/20/11 8:33 PM, ext ashok malhotra wrote: The idea is not to remove APIs. We have several client-side storage facilities that cover different but overlapping usecases. Can we step back and look at what we have and come up, perhaps, with a smaller set of facilities and better coordinated APIs. If this is important to the TAG, it seems like you should add that task to the Web Application Storage work the TAG intends to do. Agreed? -AB [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2011/sum10#webappstorage -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
