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

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

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:47:19 +0200
To: timeless@gmail.com
Message-Id: <8EA9991E-0072-4C51-8F51-8D19DB4047D7@w3.org>
Cc: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, public-pkg-uri-scheme <public-pkg-uri-scheme@w3.org>
On 27 May 2009, at 11:34, timeless wrote:

> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> wrote:
>> Just to be clear...  The expectation you're talking about is that:
>>
>> 1. upon dereferencing, the query part is ignored
>
> I'm not specifically making this request, I believe in our unminuted
> discussion we talked about the potential to allow a script to handle
> mappings between URL and Resource. (Also note that HTML5 has at times
> talked about this sort of thing for Offline Apps.)

Yes.

> In such a system, 1 wouldn't apply. However, yes, ignoring such a
> feature (or similar), the query part should be ignored.

That's what I meant; so, thanks for confirming.

>
>> 2. when present, it's propagated into window.location.query
>>
>> Correct?
>
> it isn't just query that wants behavior, it's more the "way" that
> query is supposed to be filled (and certainly is for gecko) is that
> the object be a URL as opposed to simply a URI.
>
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/public/nsIURL.idl
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/public/nsIURI.idl
>
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/src/nsStandardURL.cpp
> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/base/src/nsSimpleURI.cpp
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
>   The URI syntax is dependent upon the scheme.  In general, absolute
>   URI are written as follows:
>
>      <scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>
> ^ Simple (data:, telnet:,)
>
> v Generic (http:, hypothetical widget:)
> This
>   "generic URI" syntax consists of a sequence of four main components:
>
>      <scheme>://<authority><path>?<query>
>
>> From an implementation perspective, a hypothetical widget: needs to
> fall into nsStandardURL instead of nsSimpleURI, path must behave,
> query must behave, fragment should behave. In general host and other
> fields should also behave, as having them throw exceptions just to
> break applications doesn't seem helpful.
>
> To everyone else who wasn't involved in my discussion w/ tlr, I'm
> sorry, but the above is I believe one of the many items we discussed.

Yes; we indeed talked about how forms could work out with the mapping  
layer.

Given the scope of the work for widgets 1.0 and the insistence on  
using a "widget:" URI scheme, though, I think what this boils down to  
is really that "behave" means the two things I mentioned in my  
previous message (with your generalization to fragment):

1. Ignore when trying to find out what file within the zip archive is  
meant.
2. Write into the appropriate DOM attribute.
Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 09:47:29 GMT

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