W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pkg-uri-scheme@w3.org > March 2009

Re: ACTION-315: Widget URI scheme thoughts

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:39:13 +0100
Message-ID: <b21a10670903160739p4c6e3864o8a33717009b3fd4f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, public-pkg-uri-scheme@w3.org
Hi Larry,

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> wrote:
> other choices:
>
> *    use thismessage:  from MHTML
> *    fix   file:
>      (packages only work for http: and local
>      file system, not ftp:, but not a big
>       restriction in practice).


packages and configuration documents should be kept URI neutral (so
one can use them over HTTP as various projects are already doing).
However, we still want to specify a URI scheme for widget that run
locally so engines to fall back to file://

Having said that, we have found use cases for access of resources
withing a widget that is residing on a HTTP server. WebApps would be
interesting in continuing to pursue previously proposed solutions. To
recap. We need:

* An internal URI scheme  (be it tag:// or widget://)
* An external access URI scheme for access to things inside the
package over a HTTP:

For example

http://example.com/widget.wgt!/some/resource.html

The JAR URI scheme seems like a good candidate.

kind regards,
Marcos

-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 16 March 2009 14:45:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:38:11 UTC