Re: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General)
Hi Larry, On Dec 7, 2009, at 20:03 , Larry Masinter wrote: I'll ask the TAG to review your responses at our F2F this week. Sorry for the delay. Has there been any output from the TAG's meeting? I see from the minutes that there is some discussion but it seems to be erroneous in parts (widget URIs are used in a 'manifest' contained within a widget package). There seems to be no specific resolution, action, or documented consensus. Are we to expect later input? -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Re: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General)
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com wrote: Hi Larry, On Dec 7, 2009, at 20:03 , Larry Masinter wrote: I'll ask the TAG to review your responses at our F2F this week. Sorry for the delay. Has there been any output from the TAG's meeting? I see from the minutes that there is some discussion but it seems to be erroneous in parts (widget URIs are used in a 'manifest' contained within a widget package). There seems to be no specific resolution, action, or documented consensus. Are we to expect later input? To be clear, AFAIK, there are no use cases for using a WURI in a configuration document (which is what I assume was meant by a 'manifest'). Widget config docs use zip-relative-paths to point to files in a widget package. And, I'll add, Zip-relative-paths are not URI references, in case anyone was wondering (they map character per character to file paths in the zip archive). -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
RE: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General)
I'll ask the TAG to review your responses at our F2F this week. Sorry for the delay. -- http://larry.masinter.net -Original Message- From: Robin Berjon [mailto:ro...@berjon.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 1:54 AM To: Larry Masinter Cc: public-webapps WG Subject: Re: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General) Hi Larry, On Nov 19, 2009, at 15:18 , Robin Berjon wrote: the WebApps WG deeply thank you for you comments on the widgets URI last call. We decided to split them over several emails that have been posted to the list with proposed responses to them. We would be grateful if you could indicate whether you are satisfied with each resolution within two weeks. On Thursday it will be two weeks since the WG has sent out its response to your comments concerning widget URIs. In the spirit of not having to fall back to the rule that silence is assent it would be great if you could indicate whether you are satisfied with each proposed resolution. We naturally understand that you may be busy, so if time is short we can also discuss pushing the date somewhat. Regards, -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Re: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General)
Hi Larry, On Nov 19, 2009, at 15:18 , Robin Berjon wrote: the WebApps WG deeply thank you for you comments on the widgets URI last call. We decided to split them over several emails that have been posted to the list with proposed responses to them. We would be grateful if you could indicate whether you are satisfied with each resolution within two weeks. On Thursday it will be two weeks since the WG has sent out its response to your comments concerning widget URIs. In the spirit of not having to fall back to the rule that silence is assent it would be great if you could indicate whether you are satisfied with each proposed resolution. We naturally understand that you may be busy, so if time is short we can also discuss pushing the date somewhat. Regards, -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Re: [public-webapps] Comments on Widget URI (General)
Hi Larry, the WebApps WG deeply thank you for you comments on the widgets URI last call. We decided to split them over several emails that have been posted to the list with proposed responses to them. We would be grateful if you could indicate whether you are satisfied with each resolution within two weeks. I elected not to copy them to the TAG list since your original copy was Bcc, since it's a WebApps LC to which the TAG can contributed, and since at least several of these would be noise there. Feel free to escalate the discussion there if you feel it may be needed though. Thanks again! -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
