On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 11/21/11 12:08 PM, ext Marcos Caceres wrote: > > Hi, > > As part of LC, I've received quite a bit of offline feedback that because > > of some issue in Webkit, it's difficult for implementers to reuse the > > WebStorage interface in a widget context: the problem is that Widget's use > > of Web storage slightly modifies some of the behaviour of the storage > > methods (e.g., some things are read only and throw exceptions). > > > > It would be useful if you would please quantify "quite a bit" and for > transparency reasons to please provide a Publicly available reference to > this "feedback". The feedback was offline and pertaining to unreleased products. But those that sent me the feedback are on this list. > > > The way around this is to define a WidgetStorage interface that allows for > > the specific behaviour defined in the Widget spec. > > > > Consequently, I want to define this interface WidgetStorage in the spec: > > > > WidgetStorage : Storage{} > > > > And hence: > > > > readonly attribute Storage preferences; > > > > Becomes: > > readonly attribute WidgetStorage preferences; > > > > In practice, the addition of WidgetStorage doesn't actually affect any > > conforming runtimes (but allows a bunch of new Webkit ones to comply). > > The proposed change would require the spec going back to LC. Is that > correct? Don't know. The change is cosmetic but needed. > The proposed change, plus new test case(s) for the new feature, would > also result in the 4 implementations that now pass 100% of the test > suite, would no longer comply to the test suite until those > implementations are updated: > > http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-api/imp-report/ > > Is that correct? No. The change has no impact on existing runtimes or existing content.