People interested in the #LightWeightWeb proposal, I'm thinking about relaxing the cookie restrictions.
@aral @david_chisnall @emanuele @holdenweb @Khrys @sheephorse
/short thread, please repost
People interested in the #LightWeightWeb proposal, I'm thinking about relaxing the cookie restrictions.
@aral @david_chisnall @emanuele @holdenweb @Khrys @sheephorse
/short thread, please repost
Options:
i. one cookie, up to 256 bytes value;
ii. up to four cookies, names chosen from a small 'well known' set, up to 1072 bytes total storage;
iii. up to four cookies, names UTF8, up to twelve bytes, up to 1072 bytes total storage;
iv. up to four cookies, names UTF, up to eight characters, up to 1152 total storage but each name character counted as 32 bits;
/continued
In all cases the 'at most 30 days; still applies.
In all cases, names are stored within the 'total storage'; the actual value storage I intend is not more than 1024 bytes in any case.
/continued
I'm inclined to discard option ii because it would privilege the language(s) in which the set of names were written; I'm inclined to discard option iii because it privileges languages written in the Roman alphabet. I'm willing to listen to arguments about why I'm wrong.
I'm also willing to listen to alternative proposals, such as allowing additional cookies/larger storage for the duration of an active session.
/continued
I'd prefer replies to votes at this stage, but here's a poll: