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

Re: Widgets PAG seeks feedback on Widget Updates spec

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:46:15 +0200
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>
Message-Id: <ABFEF742-2807-4461-AE50-1F56831348A1@berjon.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
Hi,

sorry, I hadn't seen that this was also posted publicly.

On Jun 29, 2009, at 20:23 , Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> The current Widgets-update Specification
>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/
>> contains in 12.3 a description on how a widget could update
>> itself by a javascript calling the widget.update() method
>>
>> I wanted to know how important this feature is to the group
>> and how likely it will be that it will find widespread use.
>> The goal is to assess whether it is worthwhile to circumvent
>> the patent also for this self-update feature, which will
>> be a little bit harder than the circumvention for the rest
>> of the Specification.

My personal and non-legal opinion on this topic is that that feature  
simply does not exist.

It is mentioned in an example which by definition is not normative  
(section 1 Conformance further notes "Everything in this specification  
is normative except for diagrams, examples, notes and sections marked  
as informative" and the section itself starts with "This section is  
informative.") It is not defined by Widget Updates and it is not  
defined by Widget APIs and Events.

Furthermore my understanding is that this is the only part of the  
specification that could possibly infringe Apple's patent, which means  
that the specification in fact doesn't since that feature is not a  
part of it (or any other).

We can more than very easily drop the example, and in fact the entire  
section since it is entirely incorrect.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
     Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 20:46:54 GMT

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