Re: Nay vote, no Draft.

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:46 PM, rektide <rektide@voodoowarez.com> wrote:
> Hi. I'm not sure whether I get a vote or not, I'm not a part of the w3, so I think not, but
> I am a nay in Web Intents going to Draft. Please be kind if I am out of line in addressing
> you all as such, and thank you for your kind consideration:
>
> Section 1, sentance 1:
>
> "Web Intents enable rich integration between web applications."
>
> This is the core of web intents, yet web intents specifies no protocol, no profiles for
> protocols, to enable actual integration.  At presnt, Web Intents is a client API only, with
> no discussion as to how actual integration occurs below the UA layer.  To properly
> 'facilitate interchange' of 'services available on the web hav[ing] a need to pass rich data
> back and forth as they do their jobs,' this document must go beyond describing the client-UA
> interaction and must address what is really at stake.
>
> What is really at stake is a form for UA's to interact with services. Without words
> describing how this integration is achieved, integration is impossible and the goals
> proposed in the introduction of Web Intents are unattainable.
>
> Paragraph #3 of the introduction:
>
> "The lifecycle of an Intent is that first, a client requests an Intent be handled. This
> Intent data is then passed to the User Agent, which allows the user to select which of
> potentially many possible services to use. Then the service is passed the Intent data and is
> provided a UI by the User Agent in which to perform the action specified in the Intent.
> Finally, the service may also return data as output back to the client."
>
> This document describes:
>
> 1. A client request to handle an intent.
> 2. The Intent data being passed to the user agent
> 3. Mechanisms the UI should use to display possible services
> 4. The mechanism for the client receiving data back from the UA.
>
> What is missing is the service being passed the intent data by the UA, and the service
> returning data to the UA. At present, this document is insufficient for implementing a Web
> Intent service, as it presents no standards for actually invoking services. I vote nay until
> a Web Intent service can be implemented to spec, and with respect I beg all of you to
> please make a stand and vote no on an integration spec for which making services is not
> documented.

This is not missing from the spec. See
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/web-intents/raw-file/tip/spec/Overview.html#delivery-and-response-api

This behavior is currently implemented in the code checked into Chromium.

I'm a bit surprised that even a cursory reading of the spec didn't
make this more obvious. Is the "Delivery and Response API" header not
signaling sufficiently that that part of the spec is about "the
service being passed the intent data by the UA, and the service
returning data to the UA" ? If there's a clearer way to say that, I'm
open to suggestions.


>
> Kind regards,
> rektide / mf
>

Received on Wednesday, 30 May 2012 14:51:57 UTC