- From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:41:58 +1000
- To: Ed Voas <voas@yahoo-inc.com>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, public-appformats@w3.org
I agree with Ed about making a distinction between style and metadata. However, I would like to investigate further the implications of the width and height elements before considering discarding them. Marcos Ed Voas wrote: > > Well, but my point is that it should only be metadata. Initial sizes > should be in the DOM (and hence the HTML somehow). I learned the hard > way that mixing the two... not so good. > > Anne van Kesteren wrote: > >> On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 16:50:34 +0100, Ed Voas <voas@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >> >>>> * <application>, or >>>> * <component>, or >>>> * <about>, or >>>> * <manifest>, or >>>> * <metadata>, or >>>> * <configuration> >>> >>> >>> Hmm. In pondering this I also question the name of the file. Since >>> this is metadata, I'm thinking it shouldn't even be called >>> config.xml, but perhaps just manifest.xml. >> >> >> It's not just metadata. For instance, the <height> and <width> >> elements set the initial size of the widget. Now I agree that >> they're not the most optimal solution for that, but it's the kind of >> information you might want to put in this file. As well as other >> information that's important for the widget. >> >> >>> I can see it being used >>> for metadata and packaging information that user agents can use to >>> pull the Widget apart and start it up. That said, I am partial to >>> <manifest>. >> >> >> > > >
Received on Monday, 13 November 2006 02:42:44 UTC