[cap-talk] Granting access to web services

[Dirk Pranke]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Kenton Varda <kenton at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Mark Seaborn <mseaborn at chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, the widget would be a DOM element, implemented by the browser and
>> rendered as a button.
>> For requesting a service, we can use <input> with a new "type" attribute
>> value, or use "type=file" so that it falls back to file upload on browsers
>> without powerbox support.
>>
>> For registering a provider, <input> is not appropriate.  <input> works for
>> file upload but there is no equivalent for file download, so I think we'd
>> want a new element, but I'm not sure what to call it.  Probably not
>> "<output>". ;-)
>>
>>> We should provide Javascript libraries implementing these widgets --
>>> maybe the scripts would actually be hosted by the powerbox server?
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean here.  If the widgets aren't implemented by the
>> browser (in the ideal case, not a prototype), what would a library
>> implement?
>
> I see your @chromium.org e-mail address, but my experience so far is that
> the Chrome people have zero interest in entertaining this idea.  So, I'm
> operating under the assumption that there will be no browser support ever.
>  If that turns out wrong, great!  But I think we're most likely to be
> successful if we don't rely on support from chrome or W3C.
>

What "this idea" are you referring to?