Re: Web Widgets, Where Art Thou?

Hi Daniel

While widgets were (unfortunately) not widely adopted, a few companies 
(including mine) are using it and it does the job for many simple 
issues. It's true that the complexity of the spec vs the service 
provided was not really a good deal.

However, what you describe makes sense. I know there are other members 
who have been pushing a lot in the past to keep widgets alive. May be 
they'll also pop in.

Regards
JC


Daniel Buchner wrote:
>
> As some of you are aware, a widget spec or two
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/PR-widgets-apis-20120522/) have been floating
> around for a while. These were never widely adopted for various reasons
> - not the least of which was their complexity.
>
> Well, hold on to your shorts folks: I would like to rekindle the idea of
> web widgets, but with an eye toward simplicity that builds on open web
> app concepts and mechanism.
>
> My proposal is simple:
>
> Widgets are just an alternate (or even the same) app 'launch_path' a
> developer would declared under a 'widget' key in their existing App
> Manifest. The UA would launch this URL in whatever widget UI containers
> it creates, for example: squares on a New Tab, a floating panel, etc.,
> and add a few things to the document context - namely: an imperative
> means for detecting the document is being displayed in a widget state,
> and a new media query type 'widget' for styling (especially helpful if
> the developers chooses to use a single origin for their app and widget)
>
> What this allows for:
>
> - Let's us utilize the existing declaration and installation mechanisms
> for web apps (which is the same place widgets are already declared in
> today's common native app packages)
>
> - Provides a great new variant of content for all UAs who already are
> implementing apps
>
> - Delivers huge user benefit at a relatively low cost
>
> "Stupid-Simple Web Widgets: great idea, or greatest idea?...I'm gonna
> put you down for great."
>
> -----
>
> /PS - If the word 'widget' makes you feel dirty and sad-faced (which it
> shouldn't, as Android proved and iOS concurred), let's just imagine
> we're talking about the W3 Web Dingus spec for now and focus on the user
> value proposition ;) /

Received on Monday, 22 July 2013 08:16:49 UTC