On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 11/21/11 12:08 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
> > Hi,
> > As part of LC, I've received quite a bit of offline feedback that because
> > of some issue in Webkit, it's difficult for implementers to reuse the
> > WebStorage interface in a widget context: the problem is that Widget's use
> > of Web storage slightly modifies some of the behaviour of the storage
> > methods (e.g., some things are read only and throw exceptions).
>
>
>
> It would be useful if you would please quantify "quite a bit" and for
> transparency reasons to please provide a Publicly available reference to
> this "feedback".
The feedback was offline and pertaining to unreleased products. But those that
sent me the feedback are on this list.
>
> > The way around this is to define a WidgetStorage interface that allows for
> > the specific behaviour defined in the Widget spec.
> >
> > Consequently, I want to define this interface WidgetStorage in the spec:
> >
> > WidgetStorage : Storage{}
> >
> > And hence:
> >
> > readonly attribute Storage preferences;
> >
> > Becomes:
> > readonly attribute WidgetStorage preferences;
> >
> > In practice, the addition of WidgetStorage doesn't actually affect any
> > conforming runtimes (but allows a bunch of new Webkit ones to comply).
>
> The proposed change would require the spec going back to LC. Is that
> correct?
Don't know. The change is cosmetic but needed.
> The proposed change, plus new test case(s) for the new feature, would
> also result in the 4 implementations that now pass 100% of the test
> suite, would no longer comply to the test suite until those
> implementations are updated:
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/imp-report/
>
> Is that correct?
No. The change has no impact on existing runtimes or existing content.
