On Thursday 31 of January 2008 20:26:45 Bruno Bowden wrote: > > That's an interesting idea. I think it could work for most cases, but > > some lower level API would be nice too, if greater flexibility is > > necessary. > > Whatever we do, the "cookie" should never be manipulated directly. For > Caja, it's important that we use an interface so that we can change > implementation - as Kevin mentioned, Caja will not allow you manipulate a > cookie directly.
I don't quite understand this point. A cookie, fetched from a 3rd-party site via the proxy, from the gadget POV is just a list of key value pairs. I don't see how even manipulating that data directly can do any harm? > To make the feedback loop tighter, we should provide better tools for > developers. Checking the gadget DOM, intercepting makeRequests and so on, > can all provide useful feedback. When a developer is adding their gadget to > the directory, advising them that their image fetches aren't being cached > and could swamp their servers, would be very helpful. Encoding those best > practices into an automated tool would help developers a lot. Mmmm, these are really good ideas. -- Best Regards, Piotr Jaroszyński
