ISSUE-16
widget-uri-scheme
Do widgets need their own URI scheme?
- State:
- OPEN
- Product:
- Widgets
- Raised by:
- Arve Bersvendsen
- Opened on:
- 2008-06-26
- Description:
Some considerations here: 1. Widgets, or other locally installed web applications may have multiple instances served from an arbitrary origin: Preinstalled on devices, beamed over bluetooth/IR, installed from a local file system, or over HTTP. Also 2. In general, the resources do need to resolve, as the DOM attributes are resolved, and normalized, so "DSC0201.jpg" - when loaded from the local filesystem - becomes for instance file://localhost/path/to/DSC0201.jpg". The tag: URI scheme specifically says this: Unlike most other URIs, tags can only be used as identifiers, and are not designed to support resolution. 3. It is desired to shield the widget from the file system of the runtime (e.g. a widget should not be able to discern information about the file system by examining files loaded from within the widget. 4. Widgets should not be able to have unchecked access to resources outside of itself. Use of the file: scheme makes this (more) difficult.
- Related Actions Items:
ACTION-265 on Marcos Caceres to Send Widget URI scheme slides to one of {member,public}-webapps - due 2008-10-27, closedACTION-293 on Marcos Caceres to Add the tag: scheme to the scheme pros and cons document - due 2009-01-29, closed- ACTION-416 on Robin Berjon to Register URI scheme for the Widgets URI spec - due 1970-01-01, open
- ACTION-282 on Arthur Barstow to Notify TAG when tests for Widget URI scheme are available - due 2009-09-01, open
- Related emails:
- [widgets] Opportunities and ToDos ... [Was: Agenda for 5 March 2009 Voice Conference] (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2009-03-10)
- Re: ISSUE-16: Do widgets need their own URI scheme? [Widgets] (from marcosscaceres@gmail.com on 2008-08-13)
- Re: ISSUE-16: Do widgets need their own URI scheme? [Widgets] (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2008-08-13)
- Re: ISSUE-16: Do widgets need their own URI scheme? [Widgets] (from art.barstow@nokia.com on 2008-08-13)
- ISSUE-16: Do widgets need their own URI scheme? [Widgets] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2008-06-26)
Related notes:
2008-08-19 10:49:25: Here is another thread on this Issue:
http://www.w3.org/mid/b21a10670808070056t2b0dcd10mad5c4c3e67cab746@mail.gmail.com [Arthur Barstow]
Changelog:
2008-06-26 08:15:35: Created issue 'Do widgets need their own URI scheme?' nickname owned by Arve Bersvendsen on product Widgets, description 'Some considerations here: 1. Widgets, or other locally installed web applications may have multiple instances served from an arbitrary origin: Preinstalled on devices, beamed over bluetooth/IR, installed from a local file system, or over HTTP. Also 2. In general, the resources do need to resolve, as the DOM attributes are resolved, and normalized, so "DSC0201.jpg" - when loaded from the local filesystem - becomes for instance file://localhost/path/to/DSC0201.jpg". The tag: URI scheme specifically says this: Unlike most other URIs, tags can only be used as identifiers, and are not designed to support resolution. 3. It is desired to shield the widget from the file system of the runtime (e.g. a widget should not be able to discern information about the file system by examining files loaded from within the widget. 4. Widgets should not be able to have unchecked access to resources outside of itself. Use of the file: scheme makes this (more) difficult. ' non-public [Marcos Caceres]
2008-06-26 15:08:45: Status changed to 'open' [Arthur Barstow]
2008-06-26 15:09:57: nickname changed to 'widget-uri-scheme' [Arthur Barstow]