I've updated the Widget URI scheme spec, and it's now ready for publication as
a new WD.
What's new? I completely rewrote it. Now defines a dereferencing model that
fakes HTTP responses (so hopefully now will work with JQuery mobile + XHR).
New abstract:
The widget URI scheme spec defines th
Marcos Caceres wrote:
I've updated the Widget URI scheme spec, and it's now ready for publication as
a new WD.
Link for others is: http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets-uri
What's new? I completely rewrote it. Now defines a dereferencing model that
fakes HTTP responses (so hopefully now will w
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
wrote:
> I've updated the Widget URI scheme spec, and it's now ready for publication
> as a new WD.
>
> What's new? I completely rewrote it. Now defines a dereferencing model that
> fakes HTTP responses (so hopefully now will work with JQuery mobil
On Friday, September 23, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
> mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
> widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
> ins
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
>> mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com)> wrote:
>> Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
>> widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
>> inst
I've some strong reservations about expanding the scheme into dns-land.
On Sep 23, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Marcos Caceres
>>> mailto:marcosscace...@gmail.com)> wrote:
>>> Well, this is
On Friday, September 23, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> I've some strong reservations about expanding the scheme into dns-land.
I''m still looking into this, but I don't know how we get around that. If you
have any suggestions, sure would like to hear them.
>
>
>
> On S
On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote:
> Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
> widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
> instead of (from your example);
>
> widget://c13c6f30-ce25-11e0-9572-0800200c9a66/index.html
>
> why not go wit
On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2011, at 18:26 , Mark Baker wrote:
> > Well, this is progress, but it seems the only difference now between
> > widget: and http: is the authority. And if that's the case, then
> > instead of (from your example);
> >
>
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres
wrote:
>> There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application
>> (using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is
>> same-origin policy and overall just being a regular web app (that may happen
>> to have
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Marcos Caceres
> wrote:
>>> There are however many useful benefits in tying a packaged web application
>>> (using whatever packaging) to an origin, not the least of which is
>>> same-origin policy and overall
Hi Marcos,
On Sep 26, 2011, at 16:43 , Marcos Caceres wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Robin Berjon wrote:
>> Well, the advantage of a scheme is that it's solidly in the realm of the
>> implementation to decide how to handle it. We've actually been bouncing
>> ideas like the ab
I'm not sure if you're on device-apis, Marcos, but you might be
interested in this - what happens when you no longer need to intercept
localhost;
http://www.w3.org/mid/6dfa1b20d858a14488a66d6eedf26aa35d61fed...@seldmbx03.corpusers.net
Mark.
13 matches
Mail list logo
