Re: [DRAFT] Web Intents Task Force Charter

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Rich Tibbett" <richt@opera.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 4:49 PM
To: "N.V.Balaji" <nv.balaji@samsung.com>
Cc: "timeless" <timeless@gmail.com>; "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>; 
<public-webapps@w3.org>; <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Web Intents Task Force Charter

>
>
> N.V.Balaji wrote:
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> From: "timeless" <timeless@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 3:23 AM
>> To: "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>; <public-webapps@w3.org>;
>> <public-device-apis@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Web Intents Task Force Charter
>>
>>> Anyway, to your underlying question:
>>> Android Intents and I believe some of the web Intents proposals have
>>> two forms:
>>> 1. Fire and forget (mailto:, outbound video/audio/document)
>>> 2. Establish bidirectional communications link
>>
>> I see two variants here. Simple request-response case (contact picker)
>> and a continuous dialog case. I am wondering should all intents expose
>> some UI. Can they just expose a URL and allow the caller to use those
>> URLs with XHR or EventSource.
>>
>
> So this was the exact concept behind our earlier proposal for Discovery:
>
> http://people.opera.com/richt/release/specs/discovery/Overview.html

Yes. I agree.

>
> At this point it would be beneficial to focus on how Web Intents can solve 
> this problem rather than pushing two similar-but-slightly-different 
> proposals. It doesn't necessarily need to expose that particular 
> abstraction (i.e. HTTP URLs) if we can get a similar persistent data flow 
> going via the Intents model.

Yes. We need to get web intent supporting non-UI services as well in some 
way.


>
> It does help to set expectations early though and we should discuss 
> further when the TF starts up. Seems we're all keen to get going.
>
> - Rich
>

Received on Friday, 11 November 2011 12:33:18 UTC