On 06/04/2011 13:44, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
On 4/5/11 1:39 PM, "Scott Wilson"<[email protected]> wrote:
...
In my mind, widget is the most generic and well understood term for all
types of gadgets/widgets.
A widget [1] is not a gadget [2] (that's only one of quite a few
possible interpretations). In Apache Wookie this becomes a real problem
as it can host both widgets and gadgets transparently for the end user.
We just about get away with it in Wookie since it is not an end user
tool, but Rave is.
> What about keeping widget as the name rather
> than introducing a new term?
I'd be OK with that, but not OK with Gadget (although not -1)
However, today Gadget is the more recognised term, Perhaps Scott was
just trying to be polite and not force the Wookie related motivations -
then again maybe I'm completely wrong and Scott has another reason for
his suggestion.
Ross
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
[2]
http://www.opensocial.org/Technical-Resources/opensocial-spec-v09/Gadgets-API-Specification.html
