Re: Items not listed as "new" in the draft charter

Hi Maciej,

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Robin Berjon <> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2010, at 10:50 , Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> WARP is a split from P+C, its ancestor is in the first draft.
>> Sounds fine to document it that way, since the precursor is not clear from backtracking through "previous version" links of WARP.
> Yeah, the absence of a link is a bug on my part, I'll fix that.
>>> The Widget URI scheme was initially intended for P+C (as can be seen from the TBD section in older drafts) but the content wasn't written up before it was branched.
>> That sounds like a new document to me. But either way, documenting its origin would be fine.
> I think the first trace of it is in After that, people started talking with the TAG I presume (I wasn't in the WG during that period).
>>> View modes  were also in the 2008 P+C draft, but either way they probably shouldn't be listed as a widget deliverable considering that they can be used in even broader contexts (as requested by the CSS WG).
>> Maybe it should be renamed to not include "Widgets" in the title, and not be identified as a Widgets deliverable. That would be fine by me.
> Yes, I believe that might be the plan.
>>> Essentially there is nothing new in widgets, the plan is simply to finish the existing ongoing work quickly.
>> There is at least the new "Widget Embedding" item in the charter (which is indicated as a new item).
> Actually, it's been considered before :)

And widgets have been clearly defined as being embeddable since the
"Working Draft 14 April 2008" [1]:

"Widgets are a class of client-side web application for displaying and
updating local or remote data, packaged in a way to allow a single
download and installation on a client machine or device. Widgets
typically run as stand alone applications outside of a web browser,
but it is possible to embed them into web pages."

I think I will extend this definition to make sure it's clear that
Widgets are a perfect solution for distributing other HTML5/SVG based
multimedia content, such as interactive books and audiovisual
experiences that people can keep locally, forever.

We would love Apple to participate more pro-actively in this work.  It
would be beneficial to everyone to have a royalty free general
packaging format for client-side web applications/multimedia content.

What do you think, Maciej? do you think Apple could support this work
and help us get this to Rec?


Marcos Caceres

Received on Thursday, 25 March 2010 12:03:48 UTC