W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: Minor comments on Widgets

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 21:43:07 +0900
Cc: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-Id: <CBC621DB-C64D-46FA-B8FB-CBB8361BAAFF@berjon.com>
To: marcosc@opera.com
On Mar 17, 2011, at 20:21 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote:
>> I happened to be referring to the Widget spec this morning

Out of curiosity: in what context?

>> 1. Section 5.3 (Zip Relative Paths). The ABNF defines "language-range". I think this is not desirable. Language ranges are input to the matching algorithm (i.e. the user's request). You don't really want paths like "locale/de-*-1901". You want concrete paths here and "*" has no business in a path. Ideally you would reference the "Language-Tag" production in BCP 47 (RFC 5646). However, since it is a large production and you don't probably want to directly incorporate it, you could incorporate the "obs-language-tag" production in the same document instead. You should still say that language tags used in paths "must" be valid language tags according to the more formal production.
> Valid point. I don't think anyone will complain if we change this.

+1, it's a bug.

>> 2. Section 5.3. The same production corresponds to BCP 47 (RFC 4647) "extended-language-range", although it only allows the tags to use lowercase letters. I really feel that mixed case is not that difficult to support and that it will save many developers from inexplicable silent failures.
> This is true... however, most engines implemented the case sensitive
> requirement (implementers had concerns about Unicode case
> comparisons)). I think it might be hard to fix this one without
> breaking a bunch of runtimes and maybe content.... need to think about
> it.

I would very much prefer that we stuck with case-sensitive; I think that developers can handle that trivially.

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2011 12:43:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:30 UTC