I think that just puts some restrictions on the arrangement on the server. My guess is that once a resource is shadowed, it becomes invisible, and the server should not serve resources that might be shadowed unless the publisher knows what she is doing. It is not the only way to make a site inconsistent.
Chris _____ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert O'Callahan Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 9:51 AM To: Dave Singer Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [whatwg] Application deployment On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Dave Singer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: c) that the contents of the container, once fetched and un-packed, logically 'shadow' the directory where the container came from. It sounds like that affects all loads, which leads to issues: So if I load <http://www.example.com/x.m21#y.html*q> http://www.example.com/x.m21#y.html and (in the same document, or in another tab?) load http://www.example.com/z.html, and x.m21 contains a z.html but the server also responds to http://example.com/z.html, does the second load (z.html) come from the server or the container? Does it depend on whether the second load starts before the first load finishes? The same questions apply to Russell's proposal. Rob
