W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-intents@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Is there an existing mechanism that can be used for WebIntents?

From: Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan@google.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:51:02 -0800
Message-ID: <CADGdg3A9jUn9CwqjSQUciChtfirsx6GfM=u4-WCdLHY9Y1hbwQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com>
Cc: James Hawkins <jhawkins@chromium.org>, public-web-intents@w3.org
CIL.

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Mike Kelly <mikekelly321@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
>
> Yep absolutely, this is exactly how link relations work too.

The question is what do we do in the case where the action verb is the
same as a rel name "author" for instance, there is no way to know that
the definition in the "rel" is an intent or not.

>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> * 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.
>
>
> href is not a required property of <link> in HTML, so this is not an issue.
>
>>
>> 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.
>
>
> I'm not sure what you mean - I think this is a distinction you are drawing
> yourself rather than one that is specified anywhere? Is there something in
> the html spec you are basing this on?

http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/links.html#introduction-3
and http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/semantics.html#the-link-element

"The destination of the link(s) is given by the href attribute, which
must be present and must contain a valid non-empty URL potentially
surrounded by spaces. If the href attribute is absent, then the
element does not define a link."

This is the whatwg definition but it is the same on the w3c site.

P

>
> 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
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 21:51:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 January 2012 21:51:32 GMT