W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: [widgets] Widgets URI scheme... it's baaaack!

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 14:21:56 -0400
Message-ID: <e9dffd640905221121p6414ef33s1efddc6483c81835@mail.gmail.com>
To: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>
Cc: marcosc@opera.com, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2009 15:25:40 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm curious to learn where the requirement that "Must not allow
>> addressing resources outside a widget" came from?  Can you point to a
>> precedent for such a restriction in any other protocol?  I remember
>> TimBL writing something to the effect of "Anywhere you can use a URI,
>> you can use any URI", possibly in his design issues, but I can't find
>> a reference right now.
>
> The point here is that the widget URI scheme is only supposed to be used to
> synthesise an origin so nodes in the DOM can be sensibly resolved for
> resources inside the package.

Ah, right, I didn't realize it was related to a discussion Marcos and
I had last year;

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/thread.html#msg50

I thought he had (somewhat grudgingly) accepted that way (the use of
relative references) forward, as IIRC, the widget: scheme idea was
dropped about that time.  Has some new requirement emerged since then
that makes relative references an undesirable option?

Mark.
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 18:22:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT