W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2008

[widgets] CCPP in widgets, was Re: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 17:10:51 +1000
Message-ID: <b21a10670808140010m1e84435fpfdf6afbf8d2d733c@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Sullivan, Bryan" <BS3131@att.com>
Cc: "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group WG" <public-bpwg@w3.org>, "Web Applications Working Group WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>

Hi Bryan,
I'm wondering if you could provide us more details about the following
requirement:

> Rxx. User-Agent Profile Header
> A conforming specification must specify that the widget should
> identify its capabilities in HTTP requests through the Profile header
> as described by [CCPPexchange]
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-CCPPexchange).
>
> Motivation:
>
> Current development practice or industry best-practices, interoperability.
>
> Rationale:
>
> To provide the ability for web servers to determine if it is possible
> to serve the widget, or to adapt to the capabilities or special
> requirements of the widget, using semantic methods based upon detailed
> capabilities information provided by the widget.

I haven't seen CCPP used anywhere in the widget space. I'm wondering
if you could provide some more use cases for this requirement? It
seems a bit strong to have this a "must" requirement particularly as
CCPP exchange seems to add quite a bit of complexity to
implementations.

Kind regards,
Marcos

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Sullivan, Bryan <BS3131@att.com> wrote:
> Hi Art,
> The MWBP WG consolidated comments are attached as a HTML document.
>
> Best regards,
> Bryan Sullivan | AT&T
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bpwg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-request@w3.org
> ] On Behalf Of Arthur Barstow
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 5:25 AM
> To: public-bpwg@w3.org
> Cc: ext Marcos Caceres
> Subject: Fwd: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD
>
>
> This is a reminder August 1 is the end of the comment period for the Widgets
> 1.0 Requirements Last Call Working Draft.
>
> -Regards, Art Barstow
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
>> Date: June 26, 2008 4:46:23 PM EDT
>> To: public-bpwg@w3.org
>> Cc: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
>> Subject: Request for Comments on Widgets 1.0 Requirements Last Call WD
>>
>> Dan, Jo, MWBP WG,
>>
>> On June 25 the Web Applications WG published a Last Call Working Draft
>> of the Widgets 1.0 Requirements document:
>>
>> [[
>> <
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-widgets-reqs-20080625/>
>> Abstract: This document lists the design goals and requirements that a
>> specification would need to address in order to standardize various
>> aspects of widgets. Widgets are small client-side Web applications for
>> displaying and updating remote data, that are packaged in a way to
>> allow download and installation on a client machine, mobile phone, or
>> mobile Internet device. Typical examples of widgets include clocks,
>> CPU gauges, sticky notes, battery-life indicators, games, and those
>> that make use of Web services, like weather forecasters, news readers,
>> email checkers, photo albums and currency converters.
>>
>> Introduction: A widget is an interactive single purpose application
>> for displaying and/or updating local data or data on the Web, packaged
>> in a way to allow a single download and installation on a user's
>> machine or mobile device. A widget may run as a stand alone
>> application (meaning it can run outside of a Web browser), or may be
>> embedded into a Web document. In this document, the runtime
>> environment on which a widget is run is referred to as a widget user
>> agent and a running widget is referred to as an instantiated widget.
>> Prior to instantiation, a widget exists as a widget resource. For more
>> information about widgets, see the Widget Landscape document.
>> ]]
>>
>> We would appreciate any comments your WG has on this LC document,
>> especially those requirements relevant to your WG's domain/scope.
>> The comment period ends 1 August 2008.
>>
>> -Regards, Art Barstow
>>
>
>
>



-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Thursday, 14 August 2008 07:11:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:27 GMT