- From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:50:11 +0200
- To: Scott Wilson <scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com>
- Cc: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Scott Wilson <scott.bradley.wilson@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24 Jun 2011, at 10:41, Marcos Caceres wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com> wrote: >>> Marcos Caceres wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One issue which comes up is that widget is also used in ARIA to describe >>>>> ui elements. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect we'll see apps used ubiquitously; widget seems to e reserved to >>>>> early experiments in linked apps; apps via iframe. >>>>> >>>>> Like many on this thread, I don't have a strong objection against the >>>>> name. I rather appreciate the thread, it's bringing out more distinctions as >>>>> to what we're talking about and targeting. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Lets just change it to Packaged Web Apps. >>>> >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> I'd couple that with the short-hand term 'web package'. >> >> We would just be changing the title of the documents. >> It's not like we are changing the <widget> element or the widget >> interface. This is just a repaint of the bikeshed from off white to >> mother of perl. >> >> I think this is probably the 1000th time we have had this naming >> discussion over the last 5 years. Hopefully, if we do change stuff as >> we go to REC, it will be the last. > > > OK, that sounds a bit confusing. > > Rather than change the Widgets: P&C spec, how about create a new Note on "Packaged Web Apps" that references the W3C Widgets family of specifications as the recommended set of specifications for realizing the various "packaged web app" UCs? > > That way we can talk about "W3C Packaged Web Apps" without invalidating any references to the individual Widget specifications. > > (This is sort of like sticking a mother-of-pearl facade onto the front of the bikeshed rather than repainting it) That WFM. We always talked about doing a preface architecture document that explained how all the bits work together (we can probably take some text from the old Landscape doc). I don't see it being more than a page or two. -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Friday, 24 June 2011 10:50:58 UTC