[whatwg] Cache Manifest: why have NETWORK?

Anne van Kesteren annevk at opera.com
Fri Sep 25 04:45:25 PDT 2009

On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:49:51 +0200, Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com>  
> That probably makes sense too in some use cases. Without practical
> experience with this thing, its difficult to 'guess' which is of more  
> use.

Really? It seems quite natural to specify a catch-all fallback namespace  
and still want some resources to hit the network. I.e., as I demonstrated  
with an example:

   / /offline


Now Ian suggested I could instead do

   /request /request?fallback

... which could certainly work but would make NETWORK redundant. You  
argued however that NETWORK was needed because "a fallback resource with a  
mock error or empty response is busy work" While I did not quite  
understand this reason I suppose having the additional fallback while a  
network error should be sufficient is not great and therefore I suggested  
giving non-wildcard NETWORK resources priority.

You suggest this might make sense, but I've yet to see a good argument as  
to why the current approach makes sense. It certainly does not help with  
the example above.

Anne van Kesteren

More information about the whatwg mailing list