I'm not sure if you're on device-apis, Marcos, but you might be
interested in this - what happens when you no longer need to intercept
localhost;
http://www.w3.org/mid/6dfa1b20d858a14488a66d6eedf26aa35d61fed...@seldmbx03.corpusers.net
Mark.
On Friday, September 23, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
I've some strong reservations about expanding the scheme into dns-land.
I''m still looking into this, but I don't know how we get around that. If you
have any suggestions, sure would like to hear them.
On Sep
On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote:
Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
instead of (from your example);
widget://c13c6f30-ce25-11e0-9572-0800200c9a66/index.html
why not go with
On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote:
Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
instead of (from your example);
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com wrote:
There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application
(using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is
same-origin policy and overall just being a regular web app (that may
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Mark Baker dist...@acm.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com wrote:
There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application
(using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is
Hi Marcos,
On Sep 26, 2011, at 16:43 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
Well, the advantage of a scheme is that it's solidly in the realm of the
implementation to decide how to handle it. We've actually been bouncing
ideas like the above
Marcos Caceres wrote:
I've updated the Widget URI scheme spec, and it's now ready for publication as
a new WD.
Link for others is: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-uri
What's new? I completely rewrote it. Now defines a dereferencing model that
fakes HTTP responses (so hopefully now will
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com wrote:
I've updated the Widget URI scheme spec, and it's now ready for publication
as a new WD.
What's new? I completely rewrote it. Now defines a dereferencing model that
fakes HTTP responses (so hopefully now will
On Friday, September 23, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com (mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com) wrote:
Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
widget: and http: is the authority. And if
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com (mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com) wrote:
Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
widget: and http: is the authority.
I've some strong reservations about expanding the scheme into dns-land.
On Sep 23, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Mark Baker dist...@acm.org wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Marcos Caceres w...@marcosc.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
marcosscace...@gmail.com
12 matches
Mail list logo
