- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 18:31:50 +0100
- 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 UTC