- From: Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:15:05 -0800
- To: Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com>
- Cc: James Hawkins <jhawkins@chromium.org>, public-web-intents@w3.org
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 4:34 PM, James Hawkins <jhawkins@chromium.org> > wrote: >> >> There are a few drawbacks with using the link element. >> * link must appear in the head and is a void element. >> - This prevents the use case of the service site providing alternative >> UI if <intent> is not supported: <intent ...>Intents are not supported! >> Check out this work-around</intent> > > > Both of these issues are worth exploring with html5 working group, more than > happy to get involved on this. > >> >> * In the current syntax you provided, how would the UA know this is an >> intent registration? Per the spec, |action| is just a string; we use URLs >> to set precedence as a developer-friendly way of documenting the action. > > > Presumably UAs only react to the @action tokens they understand? Using link > will provide them with a slightly larger set of elements to go through to > find these, which should not present an issue - am I missing something here? An intent action string can be any string - it is simply a token that the client and service agree to use to discover each other and have an accepted basic protocol for data exchange - an enterprise application that never sees the light of day on the open internet could define "fluffykittens" as an action name (although that would be a terrible name) and as long as their client and service applications used fluffykittens they would be able to discover each other. > >> >> * We'd have to change the HTML parsing algorithm. >> > > I'm not au fait with the implementation here, is this a significant > undertaking? > >> >> Can you share your objections to using the <intent> element? > > > It is, ostensibly, a link.. so why not expose it as one? There is a lot of > existing web infrastructure that is already geared up to work with links. > e.g. atom has a link element, we have the Link header in HTTP, and links and > relations are already familiar to developers. > > Linking is a very 'web' thing, so re-using <link> would make web intents > 'fit in' better with the rest of the web. It doesn't have to be a link, absence of a link infers the current page. Added to this, the remote page has no need to be fetched which the <link> element is meant to acheive, i.e, this page enhances the current page - the intent href semantically doesn't mean this. > > Cheers, > Mike > >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>> Ok thanks, that being the case, what is the difference between <link> vs >>> <intent> and @rel vs @action in the following example: >>> >>> <intent action="http://webintents.org/subscribe" type=".." href=".." /> >>> >>> <link rel="http://webintents.org/subscribe" type=".." href=".." /> >>> >>> So, is it possible for web intents to simply re-use the existing, >>> ubiquitous <link> instead of having to introduce <intent>? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Mike >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan@google.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> This was something that I started to document under >>>> http://webintents.org/subscribe - the intents discovery mechanism in the >>>> spec doesn't preculde a UA from detecting this and allowing the user to >>>> invoke an action to subscribe to the feed using their preferred application. >>>> >>>> P >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I was wondering whether an example of 'web intent' behaviour has >>>>> already existed for some time: >>>>> >>>>> The example I am thinking of is driven by atom/rss links in the head >>>>> of HTML pages, i.e. an html page containing the following link in the >>>>> head of the document.. >>>>> >>>>> <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" href="...." /> >>>>> >>>>> .... this causes a browser (e.g. Firefox) to present the user with the >>>>> >>>>> option to 'Subscribe to This Page' where the user can fulfil their >>>>> 'subscription intent'. >>>>> >>>>> Would this be considered an equivalent of a web intent? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Mike >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Paul Kinlan >>>> Developer Advocate @ Google for Chrome and HTML5 >>>> G+: http://plus.ly/paul.kinlan >>>> t: +447730517944 >>>> tw: @Paul_Kinlan >>>> LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/paulkinlan >>>> Blog: http://paul.kinlan.me >>>> Skype: paul.kinlan >>>> >>> >> > -- Paul Kinlan Developer Advocate @ Google for Chrome and HTML5 G+: http://plus.ly/paul.kinlan t: +447730517944 tw: @Paul_Kinlan LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/paulkinlan Blog: http://paul.kinlan.me Skype: paul.kinlan
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 17:15:33 UTC