- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:03:08 -0700
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "michel@suignard.com" <michel@suignard.com>, "tony@att.com" <tony@att.com>, "plh@w3.org" <plh@w3.org>, "adil@diwan.com" <adil@diwan.com>, "ted.ietf@gmail.com" <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "John O'Conner" <jooconne@adobe.com>, "presnick@qualcomm.com" <presnick@qualcomm.com>, "chris@lookout.net" <chris@lookout.net>, "public-ietf-w3c@w3.org" <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>, "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > Re http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ietf-w3c/2012Sep/0035.html > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/timers.html#custom-handlers > > As system level APIs that persistently affect any application that uses a URL or interprets a media type, and not just the browser and site which invoked them initially, registerProtocolHandler and registerContentHandler need the security model of a system-level application. Are you just declaring that to be true, or have to gotten agreement from the relevant stakeholders? My understanding is that registerProtocolHandler and registerContentHandler are currently envisioned as APIs for the web at large. > I believe W3C should move "registerProtocolHandler" and "registerContentHandler" to the proposed Sysapps working group, http://www.w3.org/2012/05/sysapps-wg-charter.html where they can get proper attention. The SysApps working group has more work to do than bandwidth at the moment. Any deliverables that we move into SysApps will need to be prioritized along with our current work. Adam
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 22:04:09 UTC