My preference is to replace "origin of a widget" with "the widget instance", and then phrase conformance in terms of UA requirements e.g. must offer a unique storage area bound to each widget instance, must not allow a widget instance to access or overwrite the storage area of another widget instance. However, exactly how the UA binds a widget instance to a storage area would be an implementation detail.
The implications I can see of such a change are:- There may no longer be a dependency on Widgets-URI [1], affecting section 4: User Agents; in which case this can be removed from the definition of a User Agent
- No need for definition "Origin of a widget" in Section 2: Definitions - Extra definition "Widget instance" needed in Section 2: Definitions- Change "origin of a widget" to "widget instance" in Section 5: Storage Areas and Section 7.4: Preferences - Change step 1 in Section 7.4.2: Initialization of the preferences attribute to "Establish the identity of the widget instance, and create a storage area that is unique for the widget instance" - Section 5: Storage Areas: "It is recommended that a user agent preserve the values stored in a storage area across subsequent instantiations of a widget (i.e., the data needs to be saved if the widget is closed, the device is rebooted, and then the widget is reopened)." this should be change. Sadly the best I can come up with is: "It is recommended that a user agent preserve the values stored in a storage area each time a widget instance is dereferenced (i.e., the data needs to be saved if the widget is closed, the device is rebooted, and then the widget is reopened)."
S On 28 Sep 2009, at 12:18, Arthur Barstow wrote:
All,In case you did not know, Scott is now a member of WebApps. Welcome Scott!I'd like to understand the status of the "The widget Interface" (TWI) [TWI] spec and what, if any, issues are still open?I've noted these two exchanges from Scott and Marcos and I don't see consensus:1. Re: [widgets] Comments on API spec: Storage areas and OriginSW: http://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected] >MC: http://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected] 2. Re: [A&E] Last Call comments (1) SW: http://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected] MC: http://www.w3.org/mid/[email protected]There are also two emails from Marcin and responses form Marcos but again it isn't clear if there is consensus:MH: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1203.html MH: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2009JulSep/1205.htmlLastly, what is the status of the A&E LC's DoC doc [DoC] (Member- only)?-Regards, Art Barstow [TWI] http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/ [DoC] http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/WD-widgets-apis-20090818/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
