consistent now?
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
the security precaution normative would also
result in a non-testable assertion. Do you have a better suggestion as
to what I should do here or should I leave it as is (that is, leave it
as a note)?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
: marcosscace...@gmail.com [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of ext Marcos Caceres
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:53 AM
To: Barstow Art (Nokia-CIC/Boston); Penukonda Venkat (EXT-PSD-MSW/Boston)
Cc: public-webapps
Subject: Re: [widgets] PC LC#2 comment regarding icons
Hi Venkat,
On Fri
as they are not allowed
in file names:
U+000A LINE FEED (LF),
U+000B LINE TABULATION,
U+000C FORM FEED (FF),
U+000D CARRIAGE RETURN (CR).
I've added them.
For the sake of the DoC, is that satisfactory?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Update spec: PAG status
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-updates/
6. AOB
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
for using the text content of the
preference element, then please send it to the WG for consideration.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-dcontology-20090616/
[3]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-dcontology-20090616/Overview.html#sec-summary-changes
[4] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/40755/status
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
of the information by anyone else is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please notify us promptly by
responding to this e-mail. Thank you.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
the acknowledgments before we republish.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
to support [UTF-8]) with
User agents MUST support [UTF-8].
I had missed this in the last set of comments. Fixed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Just a gentle reminder that the PC Last Call period ends on 19 June.
Comments after the deadline will not be considered until we are in CR
(or in another Last Call, if need be).
Spec is at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
to reuse a lot of the code directly.
Yes, I can certainly see that on the code path there would not be much
problem (aside from the proprietary bookmarks, history, etc. APIs).
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
more
than one byte to encode a character, which can result in a path whose
length is less than 250 characters but whose size is greater than 250
bytes.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
on vacation in 50 mins, so
I don't have time to extract them. Maybe someone on the BONDI side can
write some XSLT magic to extract them out?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Dominique Hazael-Massieuxd...@w3.org wrote:
Hi,
I have also noted that the two examples in 7.2 use a wrong namespace
(w3.org instead of www.w3.org).
Fixed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
are orthogonal.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
will leave this as is.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
.
/rant
[1] Vries, H. J. (2006). IT Standard Topology. In K. Jakobs (Ed.), Advanced
Topics In Technology Standards and
Standardization Research (Vol. I). Pennsylvania: Idea-Group.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
implementers are likely to
do, it's just a waste of good pixels.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
...@gmail.com [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Marcos Caceres
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 6:47 PM
To: Marcin Hanclik
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: [widgets] PC Last Call comments, 3
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Marcin Hanclik
marcin.hanc...@access-company.com wrote:
Hi
:
How a user agent makes use of features depends on the user agent's
security policy, hence activation and authorization requirements for
features are beyond the scope of this specification.
Is that satisfactory?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
to do.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:26 PM, jere.kapy...@nokia.com wrote:
On 3.6.2009 18.29, ext Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:50 PM, jere.kapy...@nokia.com wrote:
A user agent MAY support the [Widgets-DigSig] specification ...
And would have written it as:
A user
I'm forwarding the following comments on behalf of Martin Nilsson, of
Opera Software, with his permission, to be addressed as part of the LC
review.
Kind regards,
Marcos
==
Section 5.3: Why not mandate all paths to be UTF-8? I really hate the
notion of If an author chooses to use
, that won't be in the final draft.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
2009/6/9 Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 01:38:14 +0200, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
On 6/8/09 11:20 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:34:19 +0200, Marcos Caceresmarc...@opera.com
wrote:
Yes, that was the design. If requestFeature
On 6/9/09 11:58 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:32:49 +0200, Marcos Caceresmarc...@opera.com wrote:
Like I said, as far as WebApps is concerned requestFeature() does not
exists. What I meant was the requestFeature() underminesfeature
without addressing the security
will discuss this as part of DAP.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
optimistic :) Anyway, we can update that when we have a firm date.
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
6.
I could not replicate this?
-
If the signatures list is not empty, sort the list of signatures by
the file name field in ascending numerical order (e.g. signature1.xml
followed by signature2.xml followed by signature3.xml etc).
change xml etc to xml, etc.
Fixed.
--
Marcos
cannot be guaranteed.
Right. Frederick, wdyt?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Systems Germany GmbH
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
-Original Message-
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org
] On Behalf Of Marcos Caceres
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009
.,
widget.preference just references whatever the Window storage object
is... I don't have the spec Web Storage spec handy, so I can't
remember what it is called (window.storage?)).
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
at this enough to comment, but can you describe what
you have in mind in a bit more detail. Nice work on integrating the
Wave stuff so quickly, btw.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:33 PM, jere.kapy...@nokia.com wrote:
On 5.5.2009 13.16, ext Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
Assume we have two localisation subdirectories:
locales/en/
locales/EN/
What happens? BCP47
be done before we can publish a LCWD of
the AE spec?
Need to sort out how Preferences work. Need to also define how read
only preferences work (i.e., what happens when an author tries to set
a preference that is read only).
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
think we should discuss this during the F2F.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
is basically useless.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
.
There is an ongoing debate about requestFeature().
BONDI spec is approaching both widgets and websites and basically
requestFeature() is planned to be primarily used only by websites.
Ok, that makes sense; but I have serious doubts anyone will implement that.
--
Marcos Caceres
http
to widgets.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Hi Marcin,
I missed the following:
… ignore this element/attribute. Stop processing this element …
Here, better linking to the preceding “if” could add clarity. A “.” (dot)
and imperative mode may result in misunderstanding (there are many instances
of this case).
Can you clarify what you
, but isn't there some way to load them dynamically even if
they are declared?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On 6/8/09 11:20 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:34:14 +0200, Marcos Caceresmarc...@opera.com wrote:
I still have no clue what requestFeature() does/means. The again, I
have not read the Bondi spec regarding that.
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:34:19 +0200, Marcos
). It's how browses handle
i...@width and i...@height. I also don't want to reference more specs,
it's a pain to have to jump around different specs looking for
definitions... especially for little ones like this one.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465
Mobile: +49-163-8290-646
E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com
-Original Message-
From: marcosscace...@gmail.com [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Marcos Caceres
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 5:38 PM
To: Marcin Hanclik
Cc
: marcosscace...@gmail.com [mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Marcos Caceres
Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 12:18 PM
To: Marcin Hanclik; public-webapps@w3.org
Subject: Re: [widgets] PC Last Call comments, versioning
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Cameron McCormackc...@mcc.id.au wrote
in the default
start files table (from top to bottom). File names must be treated as
case-sensitive.
Stopped at Step 8. To be continued.
Nice one! nearly at the end :)
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
= Bondi.getFeature(foo:bar);
foobarator.crush().kill().destroy();
var barfoo = Bondi.getFeature(bar:foo);
barfoo === underfined; // true
/script
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
be
the CC MUST
fixed.
5.3
it is recommended that a user agent internally treat all zip-relative
should be
it is recommended that a user agent internally treats all zip-relative
fixed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
...
Fixed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
for differently specified version= and
baseProfile= attributes.
See also the link below for a detailed discussion as to why you are
suggesting in not ideal:
http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/12/version_identifiers_reconsider.html
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
set from those listed in ...
fixed
(a user agent are required ...
should be
(the user agents are required ...
Fixed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
, then no feature string is
needed. But yes, we have a potential problem here until we settle on
the security model.
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
For the sake of the disposition of comment, please verify that you are
satisfied with the changes and response below.
On 5/29/09 4:55 PM, Marcin Hanclik wrote:
Hi Marcos,
Thanks.
Your proposal is generally ok me, feature name is just IRI.
I have, however, 2 arguments to change your proposal
The Widgets 1.0: Packaging and Configuration will go to second last call
tomorrow (28th of May). Effectively, the spec is feature complete but
desperately needs review: it will have a 3 week review period (which is
very short, but we want to get this to CR quickly!).
Spec is available at:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
I should have made myself more clear. I meant that the widget would behave
as if it had been dragged from the hard-drive with respect to access to HTTP
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
should the following inline resources load?
html
script src='http://foo.com/ /script
img src=http://foo.com/image;
iframe src=http://bar.com;
I
On 5/24/09 7:25 AM, timeless wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Marcos Caceresmarc...@opera.com wrote:
1. If noaccess element is used, the application type (e.g., HTML,
Flash, whatever) is responsible for providing the security
context/rules under which the widget runs. For HTML this
Just a heads up that the widget URI scheme is back (with a vengence)
in its own spec:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-uri/Overview.html
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
into the rationale section of the
Requirements document. Please expand on R52-54, if possible.
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
thoughts on what is now in the spec.
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
the widget, or adjust its policies before instantiating it.
Example of security sensitive services that could require
access-control include accessing end-user's storage device, or
performing a cross-domain request.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
that for certain view
modes this value is ignored. Which view modes should honor the value
of this attribute is defined in the the [Widgets-WM] specification.
This means that PC no longer has default values for width and height,
they will be defined by the Window Modes spec.
--
Marcos Caceres
http
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
On 5/19/09 12:44 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Marcos,
On May 19, 2009, at 4:15 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 5/18/09 7:05 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
What is the status of the PC's L10N model?
It appears you've
probably. If not present, it is an error.
I'm trying to help Marcos hammer out these things in the PC spec, so I
really appreciate your feedback.
Good luck! :)
Francois.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
and
deferred to Widgets 2.0 once it is properly sorted out.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
(again with my editor hat on)
On 5/19/09 12:07 PM, Thomas Roessler wrote:
I'm not particularly happy with this proposal, mostly since it doesn't
seem to make the case of I don't need anything scary easy.
I don't know what I don't need anything scary is.
My take on where we were in the end
On 5/19/09 12:44 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Marcos,
On May 19, 2009, at 4:15 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On 5/18/09 7:05 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
What is the status of the PC's L10N model?
It appears you've made some progress since the May 14 call:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Arve Bersvendsen ar...@opera.com wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 11:18:36 +0200, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
With my editor hat on, I would like to propose the following
security model for widgets:
1. If no access element is used, the application type
On 5/19/09 12:36 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
On May 19, 2009, at 12:07 , Thomas Roessler wrote:
My take on where we were in the end of the call yesterday is as follows:
1. A widget runs in its own domain of trust.
2. Communication of that domain of trust with the network is
prohibited by
In today's Widgets security teleconf, we decided to rip access out of
PC and into a new spec: Widgets 1.0: Access Requests... or the WAR
spec - thanks Robin!;)).
The new Editors' drat of the WAR spec is at:
http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-access/
Kind regards,
Marcos
On 3/12/09 12:25 PM, ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
Mmmm.
And how we define more than one viewmode?
I mean, apart from the default one for the content, was not decided to give
to the developer the possibility of declaring what modes the widget supports and how (in
terms of size)?
Hi,
Just want to thank everyone who has sent feedback on the i18n document.
I have collated all the feedback and am using it as I fold the i18n
document I prepared into the spec. I probably won't respond individually
to comments sent, but I will ask those who sent feedback to re-review
the
Hi,
Here is list of things that need to be done (mostly by me) before the
PC is LC ready (some items are quite low priority, e.g., references):
1. Internationalization/localization section (50% done)
2. general relaxation and decoupling of conformance checking from actual
runtime behavior
is acceptable.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Thomas Roessler t...@w3.org wrote:
On 4 May 2009, at 18:42, Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Frederick Hirsch
frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
The Identifier property is useful for audit and management in the
backend.
I believe
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Frederick Hirsch
frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
The spec is more than a UA spec, it also describes signature format which
affects parties other than the UA (e.g. audit etc)
Oh ok. Yes, this is true.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On 5/5/09 1:38 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
I was aware of what you quoted Marcos, but it was implicit. If it is ok,
then I'm not sure why we've been having this email thread...
I guess so we are clear as to why we have something that does not do
anything in the UA. We now have a clear
.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
in some places), etc.
Agreed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
as allowing a user to have different cookies
in different tabs in a browser: useful, but not defined per spec.
Agreed.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
.
Again, it is not clear to me who SHOULD NOT be used is directed at?
should not be used by the UA?
Kind regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On 4/29/09 2:32 PM, Frederick Hirsch wrote:
+1
I don't see the need for that paragraph.
Ok, no probs. Leave it out.
Kind regards,
Marcos
:01 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
Hi Frederick,
Some tiny editorial changes
I think we should add the following sub-section to the Status of This
Document:
[[
h3 class=no-num no-tocNote to Last Call Reviewers/h3
pemThis section is non-normative./em/p
pThe editors of this specification
regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
signature documents available to the implementation of the
[Widgets-DigSig] specification.
this is to adopt Art's simplified proposal
By the way I really think PC should use uppercase MUSTs etc.
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
.
2. As far as security policies are concerned, this suggests that we are
acquiring an additional set of complexity earlier than I had thought.
It would be really helpful if you could enumerate these complexities, please?
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote:
On Apr 23, 2009, at 12:36 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
3. [User Agents] A user agent is an implementation a bit vague. Perhaps
some of the text in the following note should be move here, to refine the
definition.
I changed
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Thomas Roessler t...@w3.org wrote:
On 24 Apr 2009, at 10:54, Marcos Caceres wrote:
It would be really helpful if you could enumerate these complexities,
please?
What I'm proposing currently (and I think other proposals are having the
same effect) implies
, that this is problematic on device for a number
of reasons, given that floating or mini widgets would typically exist on some
desktop or in an application grid, so these mode changes are problematic
from a UX-view (and may as well have a security implication or two)
Agreed.
--
Marcos Caceres
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Arve Bersvendsen ar...@opera.com wrote:
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:21:15 +0200, Marcos Caceres marc...@opera.com wrote:
In that case, it is not a request, so widget.changeMode(mode name)
would be more appropriate, where a user agent MAY choose to not honor
Also works for me.
Marcos
On Thursday, April 23, 2009, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
A shorter counter-proposal below ...
On Apr 21, 2009, at 9:56 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Frederick Hirsch
frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
ISSUE-83
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@nokia.com wrote:
A shorter counter-proposal below ...
On Apr 21, 2009, at 9:56 AM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Frederick Hirsch
frederick.hir...@nokia.com wrote:
ISSUE-83 states:
Instantiated
regards,
Marcos
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
the next two weeks:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-widgets-digsig-20090331/
-Regards, Art Barstow
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
POV.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
addressed the issue that was raised on a two blogs
about the assertion that Widget authors and distributors can
digitally sign widgets as a trust and quality assurance mechanism.
It was suggested that we should drop that sentence, I think.
--
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
801 - 900 of 1124 matches
Mail list logo
