Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs Storage

[Scott Wilson]

Hi Ivan,

No worries!



  attribute Array preferences;
  DOMString setPreference(in DOMString name, in DOMString value);
  void getPreference(in DOMString name);

With this:

  attribute Storage preferences;



S

I think what I'd propose would be to replace this in the current Widget API spec: Then in our implementation we'd return our own "widgetStorage" object for the preferences attribute rather than localStorage, so we'd have to implement the Storage interface in "widgetStorage", including enumeration (etc). Its a bit of a shift, but I think we can make it work. The main thing bothering me at the moment is whether we can still support callbacks with this approach. On 11 Feb 2009, at 12:54, <ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com> <ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com > wrote:

Hi Scott,

I see what you mean. My mistake: I completelly missed that part of the
email.

accommodate things.


offer that is missed by the Widget.set/getPref APIs: enumeration and
clearing.
How do you plan to work around this in your implementation?

In our case we are thinking to do something "similar": keep Html5
storage implementation, making it available, BUT, with some injected
Javascript, create also the Widget apis.
Our current implementation will work as "back end".

Regards


---
Ivan De Marino
Orange Labs
Mobile and Web Software Engineer, R&D UK
tel. +44 20 8849 5806
mob. +44 7515 955 861
mob. +44 7974 156 216
ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com



use of the person/s or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient (or authorised to receive information for the
intended recipient) you must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on

e-mail, please notify the author by replying to this e-mail and delete
all copies of this e-mail.  Thank you.

France Telecom R&D UK Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales
with company number 4193379. Our registered office is Minerva House,
Montague Close, London, SE1 9BB.

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Wilson [mailto:scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com]
Sent: 11 February 2009 12:26
To: DE MARINO Ivan RD-ILAB-LON
Cc: jo...@sicking.cc; public-webapps@w3.org; UDDIN Rafel RD-ILAB-LON;
TIBBETT Richard RD-ILAB-LON
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage

Hi Ivan,


of the localStorage implementation of the HTML 5 Storage Interface.

S

On 11 Feb 2009, at 10:53, <ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com>
<ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com  > wrote:

As for your implementation, of course this could be a solution that will Still, there is an important set of functionalities that the HTML5 specs This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, is intended only for the this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this I wasn't rejecting HTML5 Storage at all, in fact you can see in para 3 I suggested a way of offering the HTML 5 Storage API to widgets in a way that is far less "close" to final implementation than requiring the use

Hello.

This sounds to me a bit too much "personal" as motivation.
The fact that you implement the APIs as server side, because your

widget live in a "Local Webserver" doesn't justify the reject of HTML5

Storage as alternative to set/getPref APIs.

By the way, HTML5 Local Storage Key/Value Pairs is all "client side":
there is nothing that involve any server side.
And this should be the same for Get/SetPreferences in Widgets,
otherwise the spec will be too "close" and too "focused" on the final
implementation.

Regards


---
Ivan De Marino
Orange Labs
Mobile and Web Software Engineer, R&D UK tel. +44 20 8849 5806 mob.
+44 7515 955 861 mob. +44 7974 156 216
ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com


This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, is intended only for
the
use of the person/s or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient (or authorised to receive information for the

this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected
this

all copies of this e-mail.  Thank you.


with company number 4193379. Our registered office is Minerva House,
Montague Close, London, SE1 9BB.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org
[mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Scott Wilson
Sent: 11 February 2009 09:54
To: Jonas Sicking
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage

Hi Jonas,


the browser window using iFrames (a typical "web widget"

setPref methods, which are implemented in a locally injected JS
library.
This library implements the get/setPref methods as AJAX requests
back to
the server.


engaged in the storage process, as localStorage is implemented by the
browser itself. We might then run into issues where the same widget
was
instantiated for different users in different contexts - currently we
issue an opaque identifier to each running widget instance that
enables

could be picked up by the localStorage implementation if
it used the querystring as part of calculating the storage scope.
We'd still get an issue, however, of users losing all their widget
preferences if they accessed them from a different device, or a
different browser on the same device, which would be annoying.

(Admittedly this is not an issue for single-user environments...)

However we could get around this by having the Widget object return a
handle for an object that implemented the HTML 5 Storage interface -
in
our implementation this would then be an object we define in our
injected JS library (using AJAX once again), while in other
implementations this could either be the localStorage instance, or a
facade that maps the calls onto another storage method (e.g. Apple
CoreStorage).

It may also be worth exploring having a separate mechanism for
handling
access to arbitrary container-managed attributes (for example, the
current user's display name, role, or other profile
information) in a similar fashion; currently we use preferences to
handle these as well.

(NB: "web widgets" are not explicitly within the scope of the W3C

don't rule them out either.)

S


On 11 Feb 2009, at 02:54, Jonas Sicking wrote:

intended recipient) you must not use, disclose, copy, print or rely on e-mail, please notify the author by replying to this e-mail and delete France Telecom R&D UK Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales We run the widgets from a server, which a web application renders into architecture). Each widget in its iFrame calls the Widget API getPref/ If the widget used the LocalStorage interface, the server would not be the server to keep the user preferences separate - though perhaps this Widgets spec, but I think it would be good to provide solutions which

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Scott Wilson
<scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com> wrote:

in terms of reducing spec overlap. However, it does presume that

In our implementation, storage is definitely server-side, so this
mechanism would not really work for us.

This is a pretty radical change; I can certainly see the logic of it semantically a widget preference is the same as client-side storage.

I'm not sure I understand the difference. Can you describe why your
implementation wouldn't be able to store the HTML5 API server-side?

server-side back-end?

/ Jonas

Are there any changes we could do to the HTML5 API that would allow a

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature