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

Re: more questions on draft

From: Greg Billock <gbillock@google.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:37:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAxVY9dvGCLET0X9Bz13OnQpYyaC7KwKghGyL9apFYCqhWe0tQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
Cc: "public-web-intents@w3.org" <public-web-intents@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:53 AM, Jean-Claude Dufourd
<jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr> wrote:
> In section 4:
>
> "User agents must not place a window.intent object in the scope of pages
> which do not have registration metadata declaring themselves as intent
> handlers."
>
> If the Service page and the Registration page are separate, then the
> window.intent object is in the scope of a page that does not "have
> registration metadata declaring themselves as intent handlers". So I would
> think this sentence should be:
>
> "User agents must not place a window.intent object in the scope of pages
> which have not been registered as intent handlers."

My intention here is to allow registration to happen on separate
pages, but to still require <intent> on the page itself. Otherwise you
create cache coherency problems for the app developer. The final
authority is the service-page-as-loaded.

>
> Next sentence has the same problem:
>
> "This means that any use of window.intent in pages which do not explicitly
> declare themselves as web intents handlers must not be overwritten by the
> User Agent."
>
> I think it should be:
>
> "This means that any use of window.intent in pages which are not explicitly
> declared as web intents handlers must not be overwritten by the User Agent."
>
> And last, I do not understand the meaning of the word "overwritten" in the
> above sentence.
> I would have expected that part of the sentence to be "SHALL trigger an
> error" or the like.

What I'm trying to say here, and I agree this is awkward, is that if
there's no declaration in the page, then the UA shouldn't touch
'window.intent'. That is, pages that are explicitly saying they want
intents will use that variable, but pages that aren't explicitly
saying they expect intents (that is, most pages), won't have their
variable stomped on if they are already using 'window.intent' for
something.

In webkit IDL, this is done with the [Replaceable] modifier. I'm not
sure what language is typically used in the standards to communicate
that, but I'm sure there's a better way to say it.

Thanks for all the examination! I really appreciate it.

-Greg


> Best regards
> JC
>
> --
> JC Dufourd
> Directeur d'Etudes/Professor
> Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group
> Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing
> Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France
> Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 16:37:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 6 June 2012 16:37:56 GMT