World: r3wp

(We should clarify this.)

Sounds good to me.

Yes, we're developing for the wild wild web.

:)

I'll compromise if you guys are set on this (slightly comlex) scheme.

(slightly complex)

I'd prefer ease of use over anything else.

I dislike being asked by my kids to install stuff for them all the 
time ...

(I just know the version checking is going to cause subtle problems. 
There's nothing simpler than a old-version < new-version test)

I also like being able to specify the REBOL generation in the Needs 
header of the script. It is more reliable than requiring it in applet 
params, and more compatible with View. Still, aplet params may be 
prefered if you don't want the launcher to have to read REBOL headers.

Understood Graham, but we're not there yet.

And my kids are more savvy than Grandpa Sally

I want to sleep on this. Good ideas. We still need to think of a 
good UI....I originally thought a popup "An update is available for 
REBOL/Plugin for Internet Explorer.  Would you like to update now"?

They should be able to figure out a right-click menu.

I think right-click is too hidden. Plus, applications need right-click 
support anyway right?

I kinda like allowing apps to have their own right-click menus.

Popups suck. Could put it in the plugin space.

avoid double/right clicks

Ouch.

Right about right-click....  Just thought of it thinking of Flash 
plugin.

What about a little bubble down by the clock? Of course that would 
only work on Windows, maybe 2000 or later.

And we have to be cross-platform back to 98

no, must be in browser.

I think a prompt is better, particulary for security updates.

Flash uses right-click?

Does Flash use right-click on Mac?

Maybe status bar in browser? too hidden probable.

Ha that's funny.

Security updates are too important not to prompt for.

There is no right click on Mac.

Prompts I think should go in the plugin's space in the browser. We 
can implement them as rebol faces.

Ctrl-click then. Same difference, just less useful.

what's the name for that space, by the way ? is it "frame" ?

perhaps there should be a standard whereby the plugin application 
displays the notice.

Anton, that won't work for webbugs. We want the security updates 
to be visible even when the applet isn't.

Hmmmm.........

Especially when the applet isn't, since those kind of applets are 
more likely to be exploiting security bugs.

Are there legitimate uses for webbugs ?

Could we enforce a minimum window size ? Think of the minimum window 
size we have here on WinXP. Never bothered me before.

Rarely. They're quite common for user tracking, AJAX receivers and 
exploit code.

Do you think a minimum window size would be good ?

Running a REBOL/Services client in a webbug and having it control 
the browser through the DOM could be useful though.

Why would it be worried about showing a small window, though ?

What's a minimum though, when you could just as easily color the 
applet the same color as the background?

Here are the scenarios with resolutions in boolean logic as I see 
them right now:

 1. web_site_required_version not found on users computer -- download 
 required version

 2. web_site_required_version = version_on_computer && security_min_version 
 > version_on_computer -- popup, request download security update

 3. web_site_required_version = version_on_computer && security_min_version 
 <= version_on_computer && latest_version > version_on_computer -- 
 not sure

thoughts?

A legitimate webbug wouldn't be worried about showing a security 
update. An illegitimate one would be directly interested in hiding 
one since it may be depending on the security hole for exploit code.

It would be more noticeable, at least.

Yes, we're assuming that the web site has no control over the security 
check, nor the security_min_version (that would come from RT)

3. No action required.