Re: Widgets PAG seeks feedback on Widget Updates spec

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Jean-Claude
Dufourd<> wrote:
> Marcos Caceres a écrit :
> >From the spec " author can request that a widget asynchronously
> check if a widget has been updated [(i.e., that a new version of the
> widget package is available online)] via the widget.update() method,
> defined in the Widgets-API specification. This strategy also relies on
> the author having declared a update element in the widget
> configuration document, as it makes use of the URI to potentially
> retrieve an UDD and relay whether an update is available back to the
> instantiated Widget. **Actually performing the update is left to the
> discretion of the widget user agent.**"
> JCD: this standards trick works if your aim is to have a patent on the
> highlighted point be judged as non-essential.
> There are a few points to check to ensure non-essentiality:
> - the language of the standard makes the feature a MAY (seems to be the
> case);
> - no test case uses the feature (should be easy too).
> However, if the implementations consistently implement the feature, they
> will infringe the patent and will get a call from the patent holder.
> It seems to me that this feature may end up as "consistently implemented".
> There would then be a good case for the WG to spend some time on devising a
> proper workaround.
> Anyone sharing my opinion that the widget update feature will be consistenly
> implemented (even if optional) ?

widget.update() will be dropped from the spec. It serves no useful purpose.

Kind regards,

Marcos Caceres

Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2009 12:56:11 UTC