W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > November 2006

Re: [Widgets] Brief feedback

From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:41:58 +1000
Message-ID: <4557DB76.4060304@qut.edu.au>
To: Ed Voas <voas@yahoo-inc.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-appformats@w3.org

I agree with Ed about making a distinction between style and metadata. 
However, I would like to investigate further the implications of the 
width and height elements before considering discarding them.
Marcos 

Ed Voas wrote:
>
> Well, but my point is that it should only be metadata. Initial sizes 
> should be in the DOM (and hence the HTML somehow). I learned the hard 
> way that mixing the two... not so good.
>
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:50:34 +0100, Ed Voas <voas@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> * <application>, or
>>>> * <component>, or
>>>> * <about>, or
>>>> * <manifest>, or
>>>> * <metadata>, or
>>>> * <configuration>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm. In pondering this I also question the name of the file. Since
>>> this is metadata, I'm thinking it shouldn't even be called
>>> config.xml, but perhaps just manifest.xml.
>>
>>
>> It's not just metadata. For instance, the <height> and <width> 
>> elements  set the initial size of the widget. Now I agree that 
>> they're not the most  optimal solution for that, but it's the kind of 
>> information you might want  to put in this file. As well as other 
>> information that's important for the  widget.
>>
>>
>>> I can see it being used
>>> for metadata and packaging information that user agents can use to
>>> pull the Widget apart and start it up. That said, I am partial to
>>> <manifest>.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 13 November 2006 02:42:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:20 GMT