W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: Rechartering WebApp WG

From: Scott Wilson <scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:25:50 +0000
Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-Id: <185EF500-06D9-4E8E-94BE-9D33F6F0469E@gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>

On 11 Feb 2010, at 01:10, Jonas Sicking wrote:

>> I don't disagree with you on the implementation side (and Im happy  
>> to hear
>> that you think it can be implemented - I'll keep my fingers  
>> crossed). On the
>> author side, I honestly don't know how much of a difference it will  
>> make.
>> I'm sure someone will create a dead easy click once packager for  
>> widgets, if
>> they haven't done so already. But is there something inherently  
>> wrong with
>> our current technological choice that would not allow that? (if  
>> yes, please
>> send to public-webapps, which is where we discuss widgets ;))
>
> Ah, the old "the tools will save us" argument ;)
>
> Yes, tools can certainly help. But that doesn't remove from the fact
> that something that's simpler to author would be simpler for authors.
> What about situations when you want to dynamically generate widgets,
> say using PHP? Or if you don't speak the language(s) the tool is
> localized to. Or if a web-based tool happens to be down because of
> server upgrades?
>
> / Jonas
>

I've run two "build a  W3C widget" events now for Wookie, one for  
students (mostly education/social sci students, not computer  
scientists!) and one for developers. No complaints about them being  
too complicated to make; pretty much everyone had learned the tech and  
made one in 90 minutes.

So where's the issue?



Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 11:26:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:37 GMT