On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 12:27 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: > On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 21:35 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote: > > > > > > == GNOME Web Platform == > > > > There is no GNOME web platform. There are no new libraries being > > proposed for use by all GNOME web modules. It feels way too early to > > try to make those sorts of decisions. We need another module or two > > before we discover what can and should be shared. > > > > I will say that even if we end up with an Online Desktopish goal, we > > should not strive for one big monster web app. I think it makes > > sense to focus on smaller, single-purpose web apps with sensible > > integration points. > > > > For example, we could have a Mugshot-like "identity" app for Teh > > Social, and have it aggregate info from apps like Snowy. We could tie > > apps together with existing standards like OpenID and OAuth. We could > > come up with conventions for building RESTful APIs, standardize on > > JSON, etc etc. We could build standard GTK+ widgets for > > authenticating with GNOME web services. Whatever makes sense to make > > integration between the GNOME desktop and the GNOME web easy on > > developers and users. > > > yes, maybe it would make sense to have a generic sync API, so that the > same API and server could be used for syncing notes, contacts, calendar > events, etc. I don't think that would make a "monster" app, if it's just > a syncing server implementing a single API, wouldn't it? I'm not sure but there was some time ago part of implementation in CouchDB (there is evolution-couchdb etc.). At least the replication could be done by standard tool (like couchdb) and the web GUI will contact with the same standard backend. It may or may not be couchdb but couchdb implementations on client side already exists. So basicly it would be reimplementation of Ubuntu One on some license (AGPL?). Regatds
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part