- From: Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:33:08 -0700
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- CC: "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
Sounds good to me. On 4/18/13 11:28 AM, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote: >Hi Filip, > >On Thursday, 18 April 2013 at 6:18 PM, Filip Maj wrote: >> I fully support this proposal. > >Thanks! Appreciate the support. >> >> Side/irrelevant comment: app: may be confusing in terms of what context >>it >> applies. Does it work with hosted web applications? If it's purely >> intended for package applications, perhaps pkg: is more explicit. >>Doesn't >> matter to me that much but figured I'd throw it out there. > >I don't mind about what we go with (and I do agree with you that pkg >makes more sense as a name), but I figured as we already have precedence >with FxOS we should just go with app://. Hopefully developers should not >have to interact with these URIs directly (and users will never see >them), so it should be ok. > >-- >Marcos Caceres > > >
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 18:33:37 UTC