W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2008

[Widgets] URI Scheme revisited.... again

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 18:31:50 +0100
Message-ID: <b21a10670810071031y36cc1c0cx1f418e159cbaa6ae@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>

Hi All,
I think, for V1, that we should drop the authority part of the widget
URI scheme and leave it as an implementation detail (but add a note
saying that we might add a scheme in V2). I propose this because we
don't currently have an API or security/interaction model for
cross-widget communication and I don't think we will get one by the
end of the year (not from me, anyway... and I haven't seen any other
member put forward any real viable solution to this problem).  Another
reason is that it simplifies the widget URI scheme, but still allows
us to expand on it later (v2).

My proposal is:

widget-uri = "widget://" path-absolute ["#" fragment]

(query strings are not supported (ignored) in v1)

In other words, DOM nodes would be resolved to:

widget:///someFolder/SomeFile.ext#someFragment

I'm also not convinced that uniquely identifying the widget should be
part of the authority (if we do decide to use it, would it b more
appropriate to  hijack the :port?). For example,

widget://:a34af23bh23/myFile.png

Marcos
-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2008 17:32:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:28 GMT