- From: Marcos Caceres <m.caceres@qut.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:56:25 +1000
- To: bert@w3.org, "WAF WG (public)" <public-appformats@w3.org>
This is a response to Bert Bos' review [1] of the Widgets 1.0 Requirements document [2]. > R20. XML > > COMMENT 20) It's always a good idea to check if XML is a useful format > for some task, but making it an a-priori requirement seems > counter-productive. Look at all the proposed formats first and then > decide which one is most convenient. (E.g., RDF might be an > alternative, or Windows resource file format, or RFC 2822 headers.) The design decision to use XML is based on what is currently implemented in the widget engines we reviewed (please see Appendix of Requirements document). -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-appformats/2007Feb/0131.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-widgets-reqs-20070209/
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 04:56:34 UTC