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

Re: [widgets] What does it mean to have an unavailable API

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 20:34:21 +0200
Message-ID: <b21a10670906081134w38529301g8685c74a36f7d4ab@mail.gmail.com>
To: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>
Cc: Scott Wilson <scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
2009/6/3 Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>:
> Hi Scott,
>
>>>I can see the UC for requestFeature, though its not something we'd
>>>ever expect to use - we'd stick to just static feature declarations,
>>>as we have no way of injecting scripts into instances after they've
>>>already launched.
> There is an ongoing debate about requestFeature().
> BONDI spec is approaching both widgets and websites and basically requestFeature() is planned to be primarily used only by websites.
>

Ok, that makes sense; but I have serious doubts anyone will implement that.


-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Monday, 8 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT

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