[widgets] Further argument for making config.xml mandatory

Hi Marcos, All,
 
I would like to raise a comment in support of making the configuration
document at the root of the widget mandatory.
 
The localisation model currently described by [1] allows for multiple
configuration documents; zero or one at the root of the widget and zero
or one at the root of each locales folder.
 
While we support the approach of allowing localisation of the
configuration document (with the addition of the fallback mechanism that
has been previously discussed), one concern we had with such an approach
was that it doesn't make sense to localise some of the information in
the configuration document, for example: the feature element, (the
replacement for) the access element, the license element, the id and
version attributes (and maybe others?). In fact in some cases, allowing
different values could present security risks. 
 
Previously we (Vodafone) had considered an approach of requiring user
agents to, for example, create a list of all feature elements present in
any valid configuration document. We had not yet thought how to handle
the case in which the different configuration documents contain
different id attribute values.
 
However, now that there is a proposal to make the configuration document
at the root of the widget mandatory, I would like to propose that a
better (although not pretty) solution would be specify which attributes
and elements are localisable. The non-localisable attributes / elements
would only be valid if included in the configuration document at the
root of the widget.
 
Thoughts?
 
Thanks,
 
Mark
 
[1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
 
Mark Priestley 

Mobile: +44 (0)7717512838
E-mail: mark.priestley@vodafone.com <mailto:mark.priestley@vodafone.com>

 
Vodafone Group Services Limited 
Registered Office: Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire
RG14 2FN Registered in England No 3802001