On 27/1/09 13:02, Arthur Barstow wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I'm not convinced there is a need to explicitly capture such a
Motherhood and Apple Pie requirement?
IMHO, the Design Goals as codified in the Reqs doc [1] e.g.
Compatibility with other standards, Interoperability, etc. are
sufficient. Agreed?
May I offer a concrete coordination scenario / opportunity?
Right now there are (at least) 2 major things called 'widgets' in the
Web technology scene. Things that run embedded in Web sites / pages, and
things that "run in a runner". For the latter, W3C Widgets are the best
current bet; for the former, it seems that Google's OpenSocial platform
is making fast progress, especially via the open source Shindig project
at Apache. There is plenty of overlap. Both are built with html/js/css,
and both need data and service APIs to be interesting. Widgets of both
flavours will want to know things about people; on a phone, they might
want to negotiate with the user to get information about location, or
from the addressbook, or devices. On a Web site, the widget will want to
know about the person whose page it's installed on, and the person
viewing, and various other things. In this world, OAuth seems to be the
main technology people are focussing on, both within OpenSocial and more
broadly. I don't know of anyone who is simultaneously active in the
OpenSocial and W3C Widgets scenes. I try to keep an eye on both, but it
needs much more attention.
I'm not sure what can be done about such divergence, but it's real and
will cost money / time from those who are writing 'widgets' of both
flavours. To get away from 'apple pie' generalities, would the W3C
Widgets effort consider reviewing externally-produced technologies like
OAuth, or is this conversation (which I'm jumping into middle of -
sorry!) more about internal W3C dependencies?
cheers,
Dan
-Art
[1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-reqs/#design>
On Jan 27, 2009, at 6:54 AM, ext Thomas Roessler wrote:
Hi Art, Marcos,
as you'll remember, there was pretty strong agreement in the room at
the December workshop that widget technologies should stay as close as
possible to Webapps, and that no gratuitous differences should be part
of the technology. At the time, you said that this is a requirement
that should go into the Widgets requirements draft. Has that happened?
FYI, here's the text that I'm currently planning to have in the
workshop report:
<p>Workshop participants strongly agreed that APIs and security
models used for widgets and more classical Web applications should
be aligned as closely as possible. This requirement is expected to
apply to current and future work in the <a
href="http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/
">Web Applications Working Group</a>, and to additional work that
might be chartered as a result of this workshop.</p>
Cheers,
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C <[email protected]>
