W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > May 2007

[widgets-reqs] re: assumed Object-orientation in API (comment 24) (was: Comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-widgets-reqs-20070209)

From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:57:59 +1000
Message-ID: <b21a10670705012157q1bda09d3xf36a64bc70e8b159@mail.gmail.com>
To: bert@w3.org, "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>

This is a response to Bert Bos' review [1] of the Widgets 1.0
Requirements document [2].

>   R22. Scripting Interfaces for Accessing an Instantiated Widgets
>
> COMMENT 24) The text of this requirement seems to assume that the
> widget's programming language is an OOP language. But the WD doesn't
> aim to standardize the language (although it probably should, see
> comments 11 and 28). So either this requirement must be reformulated
> without reference to an object, or the WD should say that it
> standardizes the widget's programming language as well.

True, we are assuming object-orientation. I have updated the text to
read: "These interfaces should be encapsulated as a self-contained
object or some similar data structure in a non object-oriented
programming environment. The host runtime environment must
automatically create a unique instance of this object or data
structure for every widget instantiated by the user."

I've personally have never programmed in a non object-oriented
environment so am unsure of what terminology to use. Any suggestions
would be helpful.

-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Feb/0131.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-widgets-reqs-20070209/
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 04:58:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:10:22 GMT