- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 14:21:56 -0400
- To: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>
- Cc: marcosc@opera.com, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com> wrote: > On Fri, 22 May 2009 15:25:40 +0200, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> wrote: > >> I'm curious to learn where the requirement that "Must not allow >> addressing resources outside a widget" came from? Can you point to a >> precedent for such a restriction in any other protocol? I remember >> TimBL writing something to the effect of "Anywhere you can use a URI, >> you can use any URI", possibly in his design issues, but I can't find >> a reference right now. > > The point here is that the widget URI scheme is only supposed to be used to > synthesise an origin so nodes in the DOM can be sensibly resolved for > resources inside the package. Ah, right, I didn't realize it was related to a discussion Marcos and I had last year; http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2008OctDec/thread.html#msg50 I thought he had (somewhat grudgingly) accepted that way (the use of relative references) forward, as IIRC, the widget: scheme idea was dropped about that time. Has some new requirement emerged since then that makes relative references an undesirable option? Mark.
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 18:22:33 UTC