OASIS Web Services Interactive Applications TC

RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][R602]

  • 1.  RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][R602]

    Posted 05-08-2002 17:57
     MHonArc v2.5.2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    wsia message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


    Subject: RE: [wsia][wsia-requirements][R602]


    At 04:51 PM 5/8/2002 -0400, Eilon Reshef wrote:

    I think I see your point (I thought of modification as semantic versus syntactic), how about the following wording (which still puts the Customization issue aside):

    One small tweak, the modifications may be semantic, but the semantics are
    largely implied and will likely need to be described externally (ala the adaptation
    description in WSXL). 

    I guess I don't see a lot of difference here between this type of modification and
    general markup modification.  Both contain semantic information, both require
    some sort of locator to identify the sections implementing a given semantic
    operation, and in both cases, the semantics are opaque.



    This specification must support common Presentation formats, which are in use today in Net-enabled applications. In particular:
    1. It MUST support Presentation Fragments in HTML, XHTML, XML and WML.

     
    2. It MUST support JavaScript as an associated scripting language. Such support MUST include a way to support Actions triggered by scripts. However, it SHOULD NOT be assumed that the Consumer is aware of the semantics of scripting elements.

    Given the parallel between semantics of scripting elements and semantics
    of other elements (such as markup and/or actions), I still don't see the need
    for the second statement.  However, in this form it seems a lot more benign
    (at least to my eye).

     
    3. It SHOULD support embedded binary presentation elements (e.g., Flash, Applets, etc.). 
    [Optional/Debate: Such support SHOULD provide a way to support Actions triggered by such elements.]

    However, it SHOULD NOT be assumed that the Consumer modifies the binary elements in any way.
     
    I personally think it makes sense to favor a single technical approach that captures both (2) and (3), but I also don't see it as a high-level requirement but rather as a technical preference.

    Could you elaborate on this?  I'm not sure I understand.  Thanks.

    Sean