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

Re: Joint protocols

From: Greg Billock <gbillock@google.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:17:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAxVY9f6V5doZN-ae5qBnX--gmQVi0k=zZNdbwnnU=SAYnLdKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brett Zamir <brettz9@yahoo.com>
Cc: public-web-intents@w3.org
I support Ian Hickson's proposal that web intents,
registerProtocolHandler, and registerContentHandler be considered all
part of the same feature. That kind of thing is being discussed on the
WhatWG list.

registerProtocolHandler allows application code to handle a request,
but it handles the full url. It won't, say, chop some parameters off
of the url and do something else with them.

Letting the user apply custom styling seems like a UA feature.

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Brett Zamir <brettz9@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since I understand Web Intents may be taking up protocol registration (is
> that definitive?), I'd like to ask whether the concept of a joint would be
> feasible...
>
> By this I mean suggesting a formalized means of allowing two independent
> protocols to co-exist within the same URI, or at least to allow one protocol
> to include other protocols with the same reuse of conventions.
>
> My use case is to allow for a standard means of specifying styling
> information in a bookmarkable manner, while allowing the retrieval protocols
> to differ. For example, a link might state:
>
>
> web+pipeline:someBook.html?css-include=div#chapter1&stylesheet=style.xsl&rules=p{color:blue};*{font-size:x-large}
>
> ...while another protocol could utilize the same styling approach
>
>     isbn-lookup:1231231230?rules=p{color:blue};*{font-size:x-large}
>
> Maybe this reuse can be done as needed, but I wonder whether now might be
> the time to consider such possibilities.
>
> Best wishes,
> Brett
>
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 22:18:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:47 UTC