Re: W3C's Widgets obsoleted

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/05/2019 10:09, Theo BUENO via automotive-discussions wrote:
Hi everyone,

As I was reading W3C's reference for Packaged Web Applications [1] (widgets), it came to my attention that W3C obsoleted [2][3] this recommendation since October 2018.

Hi Theo,

Thanks for bringing attention on that fact.

I was not able to find discussions about this in the mailing list archives or on Jira. Is this decision gonna affect AGL's Application Framework ?

I already knew that but hadn't communicate about it because I couldn't figure how to announce it and what to do with that low priority information.

On my opinion, that abandon recognizes the little adoption of that specification.

AGL uses that specification for the widgets because it is used by Tizen. In my opinion that specification was really good. The main feature of that specification used by AGL are the config file and the signatures. AGL's binder also support internationalization mechanism of that specification but I'm not sure that it is used much currently.

You asked about the implication it has on the application framework of AGL.

First of all, as I wrote above, it is perhaps a low priority issue. There is probably no real urgency to switch to an other format.

Switching to a new packaging has to be considered at the end. Unfortunately, the packaging format that replace that obsolete one doesn't look to fit the requirements of a valuable packaging system for AGL.

My personal opinion is that afterward, it is a chance for AGL because it will allow to switch to a best packaging format.

If you want to start a discussion on that topic, here are some requirements:
 - authoring and signing
 - compressing
 - configuration file
 - one or more components per package
 - incremental difference
 - debugging support

Some of my company think that RPM are good candidates, notably because a dependency mechanism comes natively. Some other think that tar.xz are enough.

Best regards
José Bollo

Thanks and best regards,
Théo Bueno.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/
[2] https://github.com/w3ctag/obsoletion/issues/3
[3] https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/65
Packaged Web Apps (Widgets) - Packaging and XML Configuration (Second Edition) - World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)<https://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/>
Abstract. This specification updates the Widget Packaging and XML Configuration, and addresses some errata found in the original recommendation. It also updates the name of the specification, to be more in vogue with industry trends towards the naming of this class of application.. This specification standardizes a packaging format and metadata for a class of software known commonly as ...
www.w3.org




_______________________________________________
automotive-discussions mailing list
automotive-discussions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/automotive-discussions

_______________________________________________
automotive-discussions mailing list
automotive-discussions@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/automotive-discussions




[Index of Archives]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Photo]

  Powered by Linux