Re: Extensions Infrastructure Work

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:00:31AM -0400, Jesse Hutton wrote:
> Forgive me if this has also been considered, but what about using offline
> storage support in HTML 5? In browsers, it looks like this is implemented
> with an SQLite database, which theoretically the Shell could talk to as
> well.
> And does this really have to be cross browser compatible?

How would know what extensions are currently
installed on GNOME shell?

The website wouldn't have to know which ones were installed. If it's known on the client side, it's enough to limit what can be installed.

The thought is that the site knows about it when you visit

As you do not have stuff like ActiveX, you need something to retrieve
the info. Having something with local storage means it has to already be
known by the browser. So you'll have to change the local storage of all
possible browsers...

There are very good reasons why this type of thing doesn't work across browsers. If we want to make it so users can install and manage extensions from browsers, it should be through browser extensions and not a local http server hack.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]