Even if caja was used, shindig features (other than opensocial-0.x) aren't tamed and would be useless for developing gadgets.
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Jasvir Nagra <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Ian Boston <[email protected]> wrote: > > > In theory you can but you need to do a few things. > > > > 1. You will probably need to use caja, unless you completely trust the > > gadget and host it from your own servers. As soon as the gadget and the > > social container come from the same server, the sandbox protection in the > > browser is gone. That goes for running inside or outside an iframe from > the > > same protocol/domain/port triple. > > > > In particular the container needs to be able to force a gadget to cajole > via > a url parameter - a quick test indicates setting libs=caja includes the > caja > library but doesn't rewrite the gadget. > > > > 2. You will need to look at the way that the gadget is processed and > > rendered, as in standard form the javascript features required to make > the > > gadget work inside an iframe are normally packed into the html. It would > > cause all sorts of problems to have 2 or more gadgets in the same window > > sharing javascript context. One solution is to pre package all the > features > > you need into container and not pack them into the html stream. > > > > All of the above will require surgery inside the gadget server, although > > some may be achievable with url params etc. > > > > bear in mind, that most gadgets expect to run inside a sandbox of some > > form. > > Ian > > > > Others who have done more work on the gadget server that I have will be > > able to give you a better answer. > > > > > > On 29 Jan 2009, at 16:02, Vitaly Parfonov wrote: > > > > Hi, all! > >> > >> Can somebody explain me, is this possible use gadgets without iframe, > for > >> example can i put rendering gadget into DIV tag? > >> > >> Thanks > >> -- > >> Best regards, > >> Vitaly > >> > > > > >
