- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:16:08 +0200
- To: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
- CC: public-nextweb@w3.org
On 01/07/2013 14:50 , François REMY wrote: >> In other words, let people innovate in apps in small chunks, rather >> than require someone take over a large project (or even find unlikely >> extension points in an existing one). It's not just the technology >> that should be extensible. > > Okay, this is quite interesting. I didn't see it in that way. > > I think this is not the exact same thing as web intents, which I really > see as a way to launch a new app, but in fact a way to create a GAC > (global assembly catalog) of Web Components with a standardized set of > interaction contracts among them so that apps can simply rely on > existings components instead of shipping their own. In a sense, it looks > a lot like COM/ActiveX for web. This is indeed very innovative and > interesting, and I can clearly see how this can fit in the spectrum of > this CG. No offence François, I really look forward to having a beer with you one of these days and all, but... Bleeeuharghhhhh! I don't think we want to have a WebGAC of WebCOM. I just want URLs corresponding to a service that can be discovered and then messaged with. Yes, I realise that that's a *lot* like a high-level description of COM (or any variants). But the details can, IMHO, be an awful lot simpler. And starting from a simplified form of Intents (which on Android are meant to enable composable apps, at least up to a point) is IMHO more conducive to something implementable and usable than to even think about COM. But maybe there's a simple side of COM that I have yet to discover :) > The difficulty here is probably not so much defining the meta API > (Wish/Intent/...) that handles the communication between the components, > but probably the specific contracts because those contracts are really > dependent on the specifics of the interaction expected from the web > component. Even a text editor would probably surface rather complex > contract with things like selection capabilities, getting the text back, > context menu actions, tooltips... Yes. And let a thousand grassroot standards bloom. I reckon this has something to do with what we're about :) -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 1 July 2013 13:16:17 UTC