On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 2:15 AM, Scott Wilson
scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
Jonas,
One level of indirection is a very small price to pay for much more
implementation flexibility.
But like I pointed out earlier, and if I understand the problem
correctly, your suggested solution will
API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Thomas Landspurg
thomas.landsp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I am a little bit late in the debate, but I agree with scott
proposal and arguments. Ideally the widget itself shoud not be aware
of HTML5
] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: 12 February 2009 19:20
To: timel...@gmail.com
Cc: Scott Wilson; public-webapps@w3.org; Ian Hickson
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage
timeless wrote:
I think the problem here is that there's too much syntactic sugar
, SE1 9BB.
-Original Message-
From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org
[mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonas Sicking
Sent: 12 February 2009 19:20
To: timel...@gmail.com
Cc: Scott Wilson; public-webapps@w3.org; Ian Hickson
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Thomas Landspurg
thomas.landsp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I am a little bit late in the debate, but I agree with scott proposal and
arguments. Ideally the widget itself shoud not be aware of HTML5 storage
implementation, even if the widget storage API
Hi Jonas,
We run the widgets from a server, which a web application renders into
the browser window using iFrames (a typical web widget
architecture). Each widget in its iFrame calls the Widget API getPref/
setPref methods, which are implemented in a locally injected JS
library. This
[mailto:scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com]
Sent: 11 February 2009 12:26
To: DE MARINO Ivan RD-ILAB-LON
Cc: jo...@sicking.cc; public-webapps@w3.org; UDDIN Rafel RD-ILAB-LON;
TIBBETT Richard RD-ILAB-LON
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage
Hi Ivan,
I wasn't rejecting
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Scott Wilson
scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jonas,
We run the widgets from a server, which a web application renders into the
browser window using iFrames (a typical web widget architecture). Each
widget in its iFrame calls the Widget API
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 1:26 AM, Scott Wilson
scott.bradley.wil...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a pretty radical change; I can certainly see the logic of it in
terms of reducing spec overlap. However, it does presume that semantically a
widget preference is the same as client-side storage. In our
This is a pretty radical change; I can certainly see the logic of it
in terms of reducing spec overlap. However, it does presume that
semantically a widget preference is the same as client-side storage.
In our implementation, storage is definitely server-side, so this
mechanism would not
Hi Ivan, All,
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:19 AM, ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com wrote:
Hello.
After some emails with Marcos Caceres we reached the conclusion that
part of the Specs of Widget APIs
(http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/) overlaps/clashes with the
HTML5 standard draft
RD-ILAB-LON; zze-Igloo ALI M ext RD-ILAB-LON;
public-webapps@w3.org; linuxco...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Widget API Set/GetPreferences vs. HTML5 Key/Value Pairs
Storage
Hi Ivan, All,
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:19 AM, ivan.demar...@orange-ftgroup.com
wrote:
Hello.
After some emails
12 matches
Mail list logo
