- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:11:42 +1000
- To: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Marcos Caceres" <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>, "Arve Bersvendsen" <arveb@opera.com>
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: > To which Timeless replied... > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:44 PM > Subject: Re: [Widgets] Requirements LC > To: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> > > > (you didn't reply to the list) > > On 6/18/08, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: >> R35. Configuration Document Data >> A conforming specification SHOULD specify a means that allows authors >> to access any relevant data they declared in the configuration > > *relevant data* > >> document for the widget resource. > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Marcos Caceres > <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: >> If it was irrelevant, it would not have been declared in the config. I >> don't understand why you think it is irrelevant? > > your words, not mine. I think you should just delete the word "relevant". > > note that I'm reading everything *very* literally. I removed the word "relevant". >> Yes, that is possible (using XHR to load the config from within the >> package), but then you have to walk an XML tree which sucks. The other >> way is to use the properties that we have bound to the Widget object. >> Check out http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/Overview.src.html > > yeah, i'm sure such things are possible in some theoretical sense, but > i want to make sure that the API you're asking for doesn't > specifically do/enable this. > Arve? What does the proposed security policy say about this? Can XHR be used to GET resources inside the package? -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au http://standardssuck.org
Received on Friday, 20 June 2008 07:12:24 UTC