Remove appcache from future HTML specs #40

Closed
chaals opened this Issue Jan 27, 2016 · 9 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@chaals
Collaborator

chaals commented Jan 27, 2016

It is something that doesn't do what people expect, and while it is used today in combination with web storage and other techniques, we expect it to be rendered truly obsolete by Service Workers.

There is an HTML5 recommendation, showing people how to implement appcache, if they want to make 2015-era browsers.

Firefox has deprecated, and plans to remove it in favour of service workers.

At some point, HTML specs should stop recommending its use. Have we reached that point yet?

@chaals chaals changed the title from Drop appcache from HTML to Remove appcache from future HTML specs Jan 27, 2016

@chaals

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
Collaborator

chaals commented May 3, 2016

@stuartpb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@stuartpb

stuartpb May 3, 2016

I know @jakearchibald definitely wants to see AppCache kicked to the curb in favor of SW as soon as possible - some really great discussion in this Bugzilla issue.

I don't know about removing it from the standard, though. I think there'd definitely have to be at least a stub of a spec left around, so that nothing built on the expectation that AppCache's JS-side APIs exist would break.

stuartpb commented May 3, 2016

I know @jakearchibald definitely wants to see AppCache kicked to the curb in favor of SW as soon as possible - some really great discussion in this Bugzilla issue.

I don't know about removing it from the standard, though. I think there'd definitely have to be at least a stub of a spec left around, so that nothing built on the expectation that AppCache's JS-side APIs exist would break.

@tBaxter

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@tBaxter

tBaxter May 3, 2016

It never worked correctly, is near-non-existent in the wild (because it never worked correctly), is being deprecated and removed in browsers and has a far-superior replacement gaining quick momentum.

So what's the argument for keeping it?

tBaxter commented May 3, 2016

It never worked correctly, is near-non-existent in the wild (because it never worked correctly), is being deprecated and removed in browsers and has a far-superior replacement gaining quick momentum.

So what's the argument for keeping it?

@paulbrucecotton

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@paulbrucecotton

paulbrucecotton May 3, 2016

The HTML WG had appcache marked "at risk" for HTML 5.0 but the WG decided to keep it when we went to Proposed Recommendation since at the time it was considered interoperable. See:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24812#c11
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Sep/0000.html

If appcache implementations have been withdrawn since the fall of 2014 then the situation should be re-considered.

/paulc

The HTML WG had appcache marked "at risk" for HTML 5.0 but the WG decided to keep it when we went to Proposed Recommendation since at the time it was considered interoperable. See:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24812#c11
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2014Sep/0000.html

If appcache implementations have been withdrawn since the fall of 2014 then the situation should be re-considered.

/paulc

@arronei arronei self-assigned this May 4, 2016

@arronei

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@arronei

arronei May 4, 2016

Contributor

Current plan is to remove appcache from the document and provide only minimal details in the obsolete section of the document.

Contributor

arronei commented May 4, 2016

Current plan is to remove appcache from the document and provide only minimal details in the obsolete section of the document.

@paulbrucecotton

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@paulbrucecotton

paulbrucecotton May 4, 2016

Could you document the rationale here for this plan?

Is it simply that the appcache specification will remain available in the HTML 5.0 Recommendation and that the current view is that leaving it in HTML 5.1 is wrong due to possibly the withdrawal of browser support for the feature?

/paulc

Could you document the rationale here for this plan?

Is it simply that the appcache specification will remain available in the HTML 5.0 Recommendation and that the current view is that leaving it in HTML 5.1 is wrong due to possibly the withdrawal of browser support for the feature?

/paulc

@arronei

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@arronei

arronei May 4, 2016

Contributor

There are multiple reasons for its removal.

  • Lack of consistent inter-operable implementation
  • Service Worker has taken off as a more viable solution to appCache
  • Browser vendors are considering removing the functionality
  • Functionality won't actually be completely "removed" it will be considered obsolete and put into the obsolete section
Contributor

arronei commented May 4, 2016

There are multiple reasons for its removal.

  • Lack of consistent inter-operable implementation
  • Service Worker has taken off as a more viable solution to appCache
  • Browser vendors are considering removing the functionality
  • Functionality won't actually be completely "removed" it will be considered obsolete and put into the obsolete section
@travisleithead

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@travisleithead

travisleithead May 10, 2016

Member

Discussed at Web Platform WG May 10th Editors F2F:

  • Basic problem is AppCache doesn't do what developers want.
  • SW (v1) is pretty stable. At TPAC 2016, last issues should be resolved.
    • Mozilla implementing.
    • Edge shows positive signs of future implementation

Need to Ask the WG.

Member

travisleithead commented May 10, 2016

Discussed at Web Platform WG May 10th Editors F2F:

  • Basic problem is AppCache doesn't do what developers want.
  • SW (v1) is pretty stable. At TPAC 2016, last issues should be resolved.
    • Mozilla implementing.
    • Edge shows positive signs of future implementation

Need to Ask the WG.

@chaals chaals assigned chaals and unassigned arronei May 10, 2016

@LJWatson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@LJWatson

LJWatson May 27, 2016

Collaborator

The CFC to remove AppCache passed, so reopening this for @travisleithead

Collaborator

LJWatson commented May 27, 2016

The CFC to remove AppCache passed, so reopening this for @travisleithead

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment