Hi, Folks-
Sorry to jump in on this thread so late; I've been busy and traveling.
As W3C Team Contact for this group, I strongly agree with Ian here
regarding the tone of some of the responses. Technical comments on this
list should be treated with the respect they are due. If you feel
something has been adequately covered in the archives, point to an
example email. Please keep this list civil, technical, and productive.
On a logistical level, I again agree with Ian. I'm rather disappointed
that we can't solve this problem more quickly. I think Gregg raised
worthwhile use cases and points for consideration [1], and wonder if
this might not be dealt with in the Widgets Embedding spec... after all,
that is intended for the latter case he mentions. I can think of many
worse things than having 2 alternate compression schemes, if the use
cases are different. (Yes, I realize I'm speaking loosely and there
might be serious technical problems with this approach... I'm just
brainstorming here.)
Aaron Boodman suggested something [2] on the WHATWG list that sounds
suspiciously like Widgets, and it would be a real shame to miss out on
this opportunity for increasing the applicability of the Widgets specs
in multiple scenarios and platforms.
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2010AprJun/0349.html
[2]
http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-May/026488.html
Regards-
-Doug Schepers
W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs
