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

Re: [widgets-reqs] re: expecting the word metadata (Comment 8) (was: Comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-widgets-reqs-20070209)

From: Grassel Guido (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) <guido.grassel@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 09:17:22 +0300
To: ext Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>, <bert@w3.org>, "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C25E07A2.15B9D%guido.grassel@nokia.com>


Marcos,

I am fine with this answer.
The section could be more detailed by saying that the spec defines a basic
set of meta data and leaves users of the spec the option to use their own
meta data whenever the provided is insufficient.

Regards
- Guido


On 5/2/07 7:54 AM, "ext Marcos Caceres" <m.caceres@qut.edu.au> wrote:

> 
> This is a response to Bert Bos' review [1] of the Widgets 1.0
> Requirements document [2].
> 
>> COMMENT 8) Ad "manifest": I was expecting the word "metadata" in this
>> paragraph. (Not strictly necessary, just a way to confirm to the reader
>> that that is indeed what the definition talks about.)
> 
> The text of section 3.2 has been updated to include the word
> "metadata". It now reads: "The manifest language would generally allow
> authors to declare metadata and other properties related to their
> widget, as well as provide a means to automatically instantiate the
> widget"

Kind Regards
- Guido

-----
Guido Grassel, Nokia Research Center, guido.grassel@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 06:16:06 GMT

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