This is just a wild idea I had, and I don’t have time to adequately explore it right now. So I’m throwing it out here to see what you think.
Mozilla Firefox 3.0 introduced several new ideas, including these two:
Build a Firefox add-on.
Imagine an extension’s chrome.manifest like this:
# Library for Yahoo UI widgets resource library:yahoo-ui res/yahoo-ui
That’s all. Then you’d need a res/yahoo-ui folder in the extension which would hold the Yahoo UI widgets library.
A colleague last night correctly pointed out this doesn’t factor in versioning of Yahoo libraries. Plus, you’d probably need a generic loading library which would look for the resource://library:yahoo-ui/whatever.js file first, and go download the YUI files from the website if it isn’t there.
Another downside is that this really abuses the resource: URI protocol. I’d feel better implementing another protocol that would be more flexible and still web-safe.
On the plus side, the scripts in the library wouldn’t have to be minified anymore. From the perspective of debugging with Venkman, it is a royal pain in the butt to figure out why a YUI widget doesn’t work…
Personally, I’d rather not stop there. I’d rather make whole extensions that were restricted to content – specifying in their install.rdf manifest that they weren’t chrome extensions and that their packages lived in the browser’s sandbox for web pages. You could then specify global objects that would trigger exceptions if they tried to do anything outside what a webpage could do. (I keep thinking XPathGenerator could really have used that, just to assure everyone it was safe for 1.9.1.)
GreaseMonkey makes an attempt at this (a good one). I’m wondering if it’s worth promoting that capability into the main Firefox build.
Anyway, that’s enough white-boarding for the moment. I’m really sorry I don’t have time to delve any deeper, but work plus my own Verbosio project keep me too busy. Comments are open – feel free to tell me I’m crazy or that the Web doesn’t need this.