Re: Android Deep Links, iOS Universal Links, ...

Hi Soni,










You could possibly approach WICG https://wicg.io as a venue for this.










BR/Rahul
















\-------- Original Message --------
On 20 Feb 2024, 6:28 am, Mark Nottingham < mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

>
> Hello Soni, These items sound out of scope for the HTTP WG -- we focus on the protocol, not how URLs are used by applications. Cheers, > On 20 Feb 2024, at 11:23, Soni L.  wrote: > > hello HTTP WG. > > (disclaimer: this list member uses "we" instead of "I"; if you'd like to ignore its post because of this, you can do so now.) > > have y'all seen these? > > Universal Links - Apple Developer https://developer.apple.com/ios/universal-links/ > Create Deep Links to App Content \| Android Developers https://developer.android.com/training/app-links/deep-linking > > for a short explainer: you have https links, you have a browser, and you have an app. the same link works in both the browser and the app, and the OS picks the app if you have the app installed. > > the most important part of the process - and why these exist - is the fact it's the same link. if it weren't the same link, then nobody would use it, because it'd make the links unusable to anyone without the app. > > another important part that isn't immediately obvious, but it's something you'd feel if it were any different, is how this happens entirely client-side. it's 0-RTT, you get instant feedback when you click the link, and you don't get multiple app switches (this is critical for accessibility, by the way). > > we have a few questions we would like to ask the HTTP WG about this: > > - why isn't there something like this on the desktop? desktops have apps too. > - why isn't there something like this that can support, say, atom feeds or mastodon posts? obviously you wouldn't want the apps to carry a preloaded list of every single atom feed or mastodon instance that exists out there (tho some apps do in fact do exactly that), but maybe there's another way to make it work? (may require special browser support, but that should not be a blocker.) > - if we were to work on this, would the HTTP WG be interested in that work? > > personally we would love to have proper support for the kinds of integrations these features enable, especially on the desktop. we are unaware of any prior work in this area. > -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/