Re: "one web requirement" for widgets from December workshop

Hi Thomas,

I'm not convinced there is a need to explicitly capture such a  
Motherhood and Apple Pie requirement?

IMHO, the Design Goals as codified in the Reqs doc [1] e.g.  
Compatibility with other standards, Interoperability, etc. are  
sufficient. Agreed?

-Art

[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/#design>


On Jan 27, 2009, at 6:54 AM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote:

> Hi Art, Marcos,
>
> as you'll remember, there was pretty strong agreement in the room at
> the December workshop that widget technologies should stay as close as
> possible to Webapps, and that no gratuitous differences should be part
> of the technology.  At the time, you said that this is a requirement
> that should go into the Widgets requirements draft.  Has that  
> happened?
>
> FYI, here's the text that I'm currently planning to have in the
> workshop report:
>
>> <p>Workshop participants strongly agreed that APIs and security
>> models used for widgets and more classical Web applications should
>> be aligned as closely as possible.  This requirement is expected to
>> apply to current and future work in the <a href="http://www.w3.org/ 
>> 2008/webapps/
>> ">Web Applications Working Group</a>, and to additional work that
>> might be chartered as a result of this workshop.</p>
>
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>