- From: Cyril Concolato <cyril.concolato@enst.fr>
- Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:14:38 +0100
- To: marcosc@opera.com
- CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Hi Marcos, Le 08/02/2010 16:56, Marcos Caceres a écrit : > On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Cyril Concolato >> * The spec says: >> "When an object implementing the Widget interface is instantiated, if a user >> agent has not previously associated a storage area with the instance of a >> widget, then the user agent must initialize the preferences attribute." >> What happens if the UA has already associated a storage area ? It should >> probably say that no initialization of the preferences attribute is made but >> the associated storage area can be used using the Storage interface, no ? > > Right, I've adapted your text to read: > > "When an object implementing the Widget interface is instantiated, if > a user agent has not previously associated a storage area with the > instance of a widget, then the user agent must initialize the > preferences attribute. > > If a user agent has previously associated a storage area with a widget > instance, the user agent must not re-initialize the preferences > attribute unless explicitly requested to do so by the end-user or for > security reasons. Instead, the previously associated storage area (or > an equivalent clone) can be accessed using the Storage interface." > > Does that make any sense? Yes it does. > ... hmm... seems that Storage is tied to Window... bah. This goes back > to my previous email [1] about the window object. I think we need to > just bite the bullet and just put the Window dependency in :( See my answer to Robin, I'm not sure to understand the benefits of that choice. > >> * What is the return value for the openURL method when there is a scheme >> handler associate to the IRI ? When there is none, the text says the method >> returns void. I think it also returns void so I wonder what's the point of >> the paragraph. > > Right. This whole openURL section needs a minor clean-up: there is a > bit or redundancy there. Let me work on that an get back to the WG. Thanks. >> * The IDL spec indicates that the preference attribute implements the >> Storage interface, but I can't find a 'real' sentence saying it. I find: >> "Note: A user agent can support the Storage interface on DOM attributes >> other than the preferences attribute (e.g., a user agent can to support the >> [WebStorage] specification's localStorage attribute of the window object in >> conjunction to the preferences attribute)" but this is a note, hence not >> normative. > > Well spotted! The definition of preference now reads: > > "The preferences allows authors to manipulate a storage area that is > unique for the instance of a widget. It does this by implementing the > Storage interface specified in [WebStorage]." Good. >> I suggest that you add an additional sentence. Also, the given example is >> not really clear because it does not show the relationship between a >> config.xml document with preference elements and the associated script and >> storage. > > That's a good point. I've added another example to the spec. Can you > please take a look? > >> Finally, can you clarify if the usage of getItem / setItem such as in >> widget.preferences.getItem('foo'); and widget.preferences.setItem('foo', >> 'dahut'); is allowed or if only the brackets notation >> (widget.preferences['foo']) is allowed. Maybe by adding an example ? > > As of WebIDL , I believe the notations are equivalent. Regardless, I > have added an example. Please see the spec. Can you point me to the right place because I can't find the new examples in: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/ Regards, Cyril -- Cyril Concolato Maître de Conférences/Associate Professor Groupe Mutimedia/Multimedia Group Telecom ParisTech 46 rue Barrault 75 013 Paris, France http://concolato.blog.telecom-paristech.fr/
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 09:15:06 UTC