- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:24:38 +0200
- To: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>
- Cc: "public-web-intents@w3.org" <public-web-intents@w3.org>
Hi Mounir, On Jun 5, 2012, at 12:04 , Mounir Lamouri wrote: > Basically, if I want to implement a full featured Contacts App for a > device, I need to use a real API. I do not think the goal of Web Intents > is to solve those situations. No, it's not. Intents can't give you direct access to a device service, they can simply give you access to an intent service that may itself be enabled to access the device service. Just to be 100% clear however, your initial message gave the impression that you saw the two — the "Contacts Intent" and the "Contacts System API" (to make names up) — as linked. I want to make sure that we all agree that they're not. For instance, if I'm running a site that knows about contact information, I can expose a Contacts Intent but never use the Contacts System API. As an example, I've been tinkering with a Contacts Intent that exposes my Mac's local address book, but it does so using a Node backend that just accesses the contacts SQLite DB directly. So we keep those orthogonal — but we still need a standard for the Contacts Intent since we need to agree on what objects passed to and from such a service look like. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2012 15:25:13 UTC