- From: Nicolas Krebs <nicolas1.krebs3@netcourrier.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 00:06:03 +0200
- To: www-international@w3.org
- Cc: uri@w3.org
Felix Sasaki wrote >Forwarded since this did not reach the www-international list. > >Felix > >De: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@thomsonreuters.com> >A: WWW International <www-international@w3.org> >Sujet: [Moderator Action] FW: [widgets] Widgets URI scheme >Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 11:45:56 +0000 > > > >fyi > > >-----Original Message----- >From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf >Of Marcos Caceres >Sent: 23 May 2008 06:57 >To: www-tag@w3.org; WAF WG (public) >Cc: Jon Ferraiolo >Subject: [widgets] Widgets URI scheme > > >Dear TAG, >The WAF working group is seeking advice on the creation of a Widget >URI scheme. The proposal is to introduce a URI scheme that is used >internally by widgets at runtime. Amongst other things, the primary >purpose is to stop implementations from having to use file:// or some >arbitrary URI scheme for addressing resources inside a widget package. Is this similar to the chrome: uri scheme used by the gecko software of Mozilla compagny? (public doc in http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/XUL_Tutorial:The_Chrome_URL ). >For the benefit of those who have not read the widget spec [1], a >widget resource is essentially a Zip file. Authors, obviously, store >their resources (images, HTML files, etc) inside the Zip file and then >address those resources using either relative or absolute paths (eg >"/images/bg.gif", etc). > >At runtime, a user agent resolves the paths to resources inside the >widget package using the widget URI scheme. > >This is our strawman proposal: > >widget-URI = "widget:" "//" UUID "/" zip-rel-path >zip-rel-path = [ *localized-folder ] [ *folder ] [ filename ] / > [localized-folder] [ *folder] / [ folder ] >localized-folder = language-tag delimiter >folder = filename delimiter >delimiter = U+002F >filename = 1*254( *basename [file-extension] ) >basename = allowed-chars >file-extension = "." 1*allowed-chars >allowed-chars = cp437 / utf8-range >utf8-chars = ascii-range / U+0080 and beyond >cp437-chars = ascii-range / x80-FF; >ascii-chars = ALPHA / DIGIT / SP / "$" / "%" / "'" / "-" / "_" / >"@" > / "~" / "`" / "!" / "(" / ")" / "^" / "#" / "&" / >"+" > / "," / "." / "=" / "[" / "]" > >Language-tag is defined in RFC4646 (BCP47). UUID (Universally Unique >IDentifier) is defined in rfc4122. The intention of using UUIDs (or >some random number) is to identify the current running instance of a >widget when multiple instances are running simultaneously. Authors >would not be able to address other widgets via this scheme (in fact, >there should be no reason at all for authors to use this scheme). > >Within WAF, concerns have been raised about using UUIDs as the >identifier and arguments have been made that UUID should be replaced >by some random number generated internally by a widget engine (ie. >leave the choice of random number sequence as an implementation >detail. Eg hashing the name of the widget and time of download). >However, not all members are comfortable with leaving the generation >of random number sequence to implementations as it could introduce >issues. > >It has also been proposed that, instead of using "widget://", we use >"zip://" to create a more generic addressing mechanism for Zip files >[2]. > >Any thoughts, comments, or guidance would be appreciated. > >Kind regards, >Marcos > >[1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/ >[2] >-- >Marcos Caceres >http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Saturday, 24 May 2008 19:20:38 UTC