W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: widgets feedback

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:12:33 +0200
Message-ID: <b21a10670907030712t2fcad57en6ec15d01cd617e1c@mail.gmail.com>
To: timeless@gmail.com
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Hi Josh,

Fixed issues below. If satisfied with the corrections, please give us
an OK for the DoC :)

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:27 PM, timeless<timeless@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
>
> Date: Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:52 AM
>
> 2:29 AM me: hey
>   suppose that times square becomes widget capable
> 2:30 AM and starts running widgets, like a Clock.wdgt
>   who's the "end user"? :){

I guess the person at Times Square that made the decision to activate
the widget.

> ________________________________
> 9 minutes
> 2:40 AM me: Bluetooth is spelled as such, no capital T
>   (i.e., users can share widgets over non-HTTP distribution channels,
> such as BlueTooth, a USB thumb drive, etc.).

Fixed

>   the idea of using both 'i.e.' and 'etc.' in the same parenthetical
> scares me. although it might be correct in this instance

Dropped etc.; I've no intention of being a grammatical terrorist :)

> 2:41 AM Supported means that a user agent implements a said specification,
>   said -> mentioned ?
>   "a said" sounds really odd
> 2:42 AM maybe "listed", "indicated", ... dunno

Fixed. Used "mentioned"

>   Initialization means a run through the steps for processing a widget
> package post installation of a widget.
>   post => after ?

Used "after".

> 2:43 AM As well as sections marked as non-normative, authoring
> guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are
> non-normative.
>   is hard to parse.
>   <As well as sections marked as non-normative>, <authoring
> guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes> in this specification are
> non-normative.
> 2:44 AM In addition to (non-normative marked|marked non-normative)
> sections, all authoring guidelines, ... and notes in this
> specification are ... non-normative.
Made it:

[[
Some text in this specification is non-normative. Non-normative text includes:
 * sections marked with the text This section is non-normative,
 *authoring guidelines,
 * examples, including sentences that contain the words "for example",
 * and notes.

Everything else in this specification is normative.

Please see the typographical conventions to see how authoring
guidelines, examples, and notes of this specification are stylized.
]]

There are no diagrams, so I removed that.

> 2:46 AM There are four classes of products that can claim conformance
> to this specification:
> 2:47 AM that => which ?
>   (very uncertain about that)

AFAIK, "that" is correct here. But I can't be bothered looking up a
manual of style.

> 2:49 AM Other legacy/proprietary widget types can be supported by a
> user agent, but a user agent must conform to this specification when
> dealing with a widget package.
>   should this say:
> 2:52 AM While a conforming user agent may support other
> legacy/proprietary widget types in order to conform to this
> specification it must treat widget packages as according to this
> specification.

Fixed.




-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Friday, 3 July 2009 14:13:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:32 GMT