[whatwg] Application Cache

[Edward Gerhold]

Dear Working Group and Subscribers,

i still think, it makes sense to upgrade the cache. Currently i am watching
Coukumas Video about the cache again, i have the original document hixie
writes in front of me as well as a pen, at the moment i have no text markers
i use rather and often anywhere else, and i have in mind to write down the
document for.

When i opened the spec again, i thought "oh my god, how can i insert my idea
here?". Then i remembered the content of the chapter, then i read the IDL
definitions and the step by step algorithms and everything became clear
again.

Last mail i´d been wrong, i´ve read the inspector again. The Master,
Manifest and Explicit entries lighted up as mime type in my mind, but only
the cell´s name "Type" has been right.

Considering the last chapter in the spec, Disk Space, i think "Yes, should
be with quota."
Well, what i want to say is, i read the doc, listen to the arguments in the
video again and again, mark the places and spaces, learn the terms, try to
write my document, i also though about directly editing ians document, i
guess i´ll have to do both, i´ll write down the cases, i need the
enhancements for, to give some reasons, i´ll write down the interfaces, and
i´ll explain step by step what the algorithms do. Not like in my mail, i see
it here in the original. This is easy, anyways, i can program the little bit
i want added, so i can write down the algorithms step by step. Anyways, this
is some work for me, too and i do a lot of other stuff, too, so i won´t post
it tomorrow. But i STILL think, it makes sense.

Hehe, in the video i heared, that a bug was fixed, that if whitelisted
entries had a fallback, the fallback was always used. After that, he
reminded me of the http:// prefix, this round i already forgot the words he
said, but it reminds me of testing the http://linux-swt.de/index.php again
in the NETWORK section, as, he said, the network prefixed urls never come
into the cache.  But - it didn´t work before. If this works, i´ll write this
down for my users and say "Yo!". But it wouldn´t change my mind about
feature completeness and giving us programmers full access to the cache. I
could have skipped this argument in any case now, i didn´t want to
downgrade, what i say.

Well, i am working on the concept, to state it clear, what i (we) want to
have in the cache, the current situation is good, it is usable for certain
cases, but not very good, because the constraints are too large, and there
is no programmatic access to the array with the manifested files. There is a
need to grow and shrink the list, to add pages, to update existing and to
remove pages (or media) from the list. As the mime isn´t saved, and i don´t
want to think about sniff the content for each entry, saving the http
request, i discarded again together with agreeing to a local identifier (a
rename url function was my first thought, but a local identifier is right),
again, saving the http request is meaningful, too. (Feature completeness).

Well, i´ll write down the whole thing and post it. I don´t know how far i
can edit the original document and strike the phrases through and insert the
new. I am not so far
today :-) But i´ll keep it in mind and on my list. Hehe. Ok, i´m gonna
rewind the video (he is within the questions) and continue reading the
original.

With friendly regards

Edward Gerhold