On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 23:37:55 +0100, Michael Nordman <[email protected]>
wrote:
Would the public-webapps list be better for discussing appcache
feature requests?
It's not a feature drafted in any of the WebApps WG specifications. If you
want to discuss at the W3C the appropriate place would be the HTML WG.
Also,
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Is_there_a_process_for_adding_new_features_to_a_specification.3F
might be interesting. (Though you are probably aware of it.)
This could be as simple as the presence of an
'applicationcaching_allowed' file at the top level. An https manifest
update that wants to retrieve resources from another https origin
would first have to fetch the 'allow' file and see an expected
response, and if it doesn't see a good response, those xorigin entries
would be skipped (matching today's behavior).
The request...
GET /applicationcaching_allowed
Referer: <manifestUrl of the cache trying to include resources from
this host>
The expected response headers...
HTTP/1.x 200 OK
Content-Type: text/plain
The expected response body...
Allowed:*
So far we have avoided this type of design as it is rather brittle. Maybe
CORS can be used?
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
