W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Contact API & vCard: phone numbers (like ims) should be explicitly scheme independent

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 15:30:45 +0200
To: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>
Cc: Erick Johnson <erick@junctionnetworks.com>, public-device-apis@w3.org
Message-ID: <1306157445.12411.55.camel@altostratustier>
Le jeudi 19 mai 2011 à 19:17 +0200, Rich Tibbett a écrit :
> > Since there is no canonical definition of the attribute value currently
>  > I think that what I'm asking for is implicitly allowed, however I
>  > worry that with the current name of the field and without an explicit
>  > definition of the value, that the validity of using any voice capable
>  > URL in the phone field would become unclear.
> >
> 
> We didn't place any semantic or syntactic values on these properties for 
> precisely this reason. While your concerns are not explicitly covered in 
> the specification they are implicitly valid and therefore don't 
> absolutely require prose. User agents are free to do what they wish with 
> such data contained therein (e.g. highlight sip: addresses for click 
> activation to start a call or launch an external application to start a 
> comms session).

While it is true that both "tel:+1.617.761.6200" and
"sip:zakim@voip.w3.org" would be valid values for phone numbers, so
would "+1 617 761 6200" (no URL scheme) or "dial 1, then 6, then 1...".

Shouldn't we say that values for phoneNumbers MUST be URIs? Otherwise,
developers will have to deal with all the possible inconsistencies (e.g.
determine whether the field is a URL or not) which I think the API
should abstract away as much as possible.

This would also apply to ims, emails; where photos currently uses either
a URL or a base64 encoding, it could be simplified by always being a
URL, including data: URL.

Dom
Received on Monday, 23 May 2011 13:31:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:20 GMT