[widgets] 'widget:' protocol

Is the main benefit of the 'widget:' protocol so that widget authors can
have the convenient option of using "/" based relative addressing (e.g.,
/images/image1.jpg) instead of having to use ".." relative addressing
(e.g., ../../../images/image1.jpg)?

If that's the main benefit, I'm not sure that the benefit/cost ratio is
large enough. Isn't the proposal of a new protocol going to take a lot of
time to work out the technical details and march through the standards
processes, such as coordination with the URL community? For example,
perhaps someone will say the protocol should be called "zip:" instead of
"widget:" to make it general to all ZIP-based formats instead of just the
one use of ZIP packaging by the Widgets spec. (But perhaps I'm being too
timid about the standards difficulties.)

Jon