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

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

From: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 10:15:13 +0200
Message-ID: <4A1CF691.1030107@telecom-paristech.fr>
To: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>
CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-pkg-uri-scheme <public-pkg-uri-scheme@w3.org>
Arve Bersvendsen a écrit :
> The main issue here, I think, is one of being proactive on this 
> front.  Given that absolute URIs are required for resolution, and that 
> UA vendors will, unless specified, have to pick a URI scheme of their 
> own, the situation may well arise where they have specified something 
> that would either be insecure (eg. file:), incompatible ( again, 
> file:) or inappropriate (all schemes that fail to make query strings 
> and fragment identifiers useful)
>
JCD: I am unconfortable with such thinking that standards makers somehow 
know better than implementors (and I am a standard maker).
This is a case where you would expose the problem in an informative part 
of the spec and propose (not mandate) a working solution to implementers.
If it is not seen by the author, and not useful for interoperability, 
there is no reason to mandate a solution.
Otherwise, you force extra technology on vendors, and that is a recipe 
for failing standards.
Best regards
JC

PS: I agree with Thomas, but my tack is different.

-- 
JC Dufourd
Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group
Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing
Télécom ParisTech, 46 rue Barrault, 75 013 Paris, France 
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 08:15:53 GMT

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