Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 9/16/10 6:10 PM, Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
As above. I thought that was what we (Web Apps WG - Widgets) have been
doing for the last 5 years?
Maybe I've missed part of the specifications - are you telling me that I
can package up an
Hi Tim,
In [1], it sounds to me like you are after W3C Widgets [2]; we have
almost finished standardizing them so no need to wait.
You can play with them today in Opera [3] and a bunch of other great
runtimes [4].
Kind regards,
Marcos
[1]
On 8 Feb 2011, at 18:48, Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Tim,
In [1], it sounds to me like you are after W3C Widgets [2]; we have almost
finished standardizing them so no need to wait.
You might also find this post useful:
Hi - just wanted to note that Mozilla Labs people are here and listening.
There are people in the labs group that are very interested in web application
deployment into the main browser context. We are not particularly focused on
widgets per se (as has been noted there are many runtimes for
On 17 Sep 2010, at 01:30, Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Nathan,
There are many applications that are currently stuck using a server
because there is no clear path to deploying 100% client side
applications, examples include micro-blogging clients, note/task-pads,
image editors, contact
applications?
So far there has been a distinction between browser, running dynamic content on web
sites and widget user agent, running installed web widgets. Reading you original mail
in this thread you say:
Simply wondering why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't used to
deploy
why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't
used to deploy js applications which run in the main browser context?.
So, what are you actually proposing?
* Update to HTML5 to support packaged and installed web applications in
the main browser context?
Plus
* Updates to the Widgets
why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't
used to deploy js applications which run in the main browser context?.
So, what are you actually proposing?
* Update to HTML5 to support packaged and installed web applications in
the main browser context?
Plus
* Updates to the Widgets
Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
Hi All,
Simply wondering why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't
used to deploy js applications which run in the main browser context?
I guess because they all have counterparts on the Web
in this thread you say:
Simply wondering why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures
aren't
used to deploy js applications which run in the main browser context?.
So, what are you actually proposing?
* Update to HTML5 to support packaged and installed web
applications in
the main browser context
On 9/16/10 6:17 PM, Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
Hi All,
Simply wondering why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't
used to deploy js applications which run in the main browser context?
I guess because
Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 9/16/10 6:10 PM, Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
As above. I thought that was what we (Web Apps WG - Widgets) have been
doing for the last 5 years?
Maybe I've missed part of the specifications - are you telling me that I
can package up an HTML,CSS,JS based
Hi Nathan,
On 9/16/10 7:38 PM, Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 9/16/10 6:10 PM, Nathan wrote:
Marcos Caceres wrote:
As above. I thought that was what we (Web Apps WG - Widgets) have been
doing for the last 5 years?
Maybe I've missed part of the specifications - are you telling me
FYI, Nathan and others discussed Nathan's e-mail on the device-apis list:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Sep/0034.html
On 9/3/10 1:52 PM, ext Nathan wrote:
Hi All,
Simply wondering why WARP, Widgets Updates and Digital Signatures aren't
used to deploy js
14 matches
Mail list logo
