andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com
Fri Oct 11 10:01:02 PDT 2013
As I've said, you keep confining the problem and the solution over HTTP and
servers while I see this approach, maybe slightly revisited, a good
**generic bundling** solution even without a server and easily adoptable
now plus this will not mean HTTP 2 won't be handy to help with this case
The proposal could be revisited to tell browsers to look for
package.zip/index.html automagically once opened so we'll have a bundle
that can work over HTTP and over Bluetooth exchange too.
So, my counter question would be: do we have a standard generic bundle
option that works same way every other programming language has ? (war
files, python distributable with self extracting archive and execution,
.NET apps, etc etc etc)
If such thing exists plus HTTP2 will solve all other problems then I agree
it's not a good idea to implement this now.
If such thing does not exist I would like to keep thinking the combination
JS + HTML + CSS can offer a lot even without a webserver behind or any
protocol ... there is a database that does not need a connection and all
tools needed to offer great applications.
You guys know this better than me with FirefoxOS.
My 2 cents
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 7:37 AM, David Bruant <bruant.d at gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 11/10/2013 15:51, Russell Leggett a écrit :
> Not sure if this changes anything, carry on.
>> Server push is happening as part of HTTP 2.0. Do you have a use case in
>> which it's insufficient?
> Not sure if this was directed at me or Jorge
> To anyone really, trying to understand if people are doing things that
> aren't solved by HTTP 2.0 server push.
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss