- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 20:37:14 +0800
- To: "Marcos Caceres" <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>, public-appformats@w3.org
On 4/25/08, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org> wrote: > On 2007-12-04 14:17:01 +1000, Marcos Caceres wrote: > > > I guess one thing we don't need to worry about at the moment is > > concerning ourselves with the widget.system() API, as we > > currently don't spec it ( should we?:) ).... > > Given the commonality of widget.system like APIs, I wonder if it > wouldn't be useful to actually spec something -- and not > widget.system, but an API along the lines of execve() on Unix. Ok, I'll investigate that. However, we are still waiting for Opera to drop their security bombshell on us (who knows, they might propose something like that). Nevertheles, I fear that opening up the system calls side of things might be beyond the scope of widgets 1.0... thought it would make the specification actually *really* useful. Kind regards, Marcos Kind regards, Marcos -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 12:37:54 UTC