Re: Adding Web Intents to the Webapps WG deliverables

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com (mailto:
> robin@berjon.com)> wrote:
> > >  Hi Charles,
> > >
> > >  On Sep 20, 2011, at 17:15 , Charles Pritchard wrote:
> > > > There is certainly some overlap between DAP and WebApps. Is that the
> issue here, Robin?
> > >
> > > If you ask me, there isn't any issue at all :) James suggested that
> WebApps take over Intents. Since it isn't in WebApps's deliverables, this
> could require some process mongering which I think we can all agree is an
> annoying waste of time. As it happens however, DAP already has Intents in
> its charter, so getting to work right now rather than walking the
> bureaucratic path is a simple matter of doing the work there.
> >
> > There's process mongering to get relevant parties to join DAP. This is
> not free. If you can guarantee me that the other browsers will join DAP then
> let's talk (namely MSFT who just announced a similar spec for Metro, and it
> would be very important to get their input here.)
> That presupposes that Microsoft would have anything to say even in this WG.
> Obviously, I can't speak for Microsoft (and I won't), but just because
> someone is part of the WG doesn't mean that they will say anything … or
> worst, they will just exclude patents willy-nilly like Apple did with
> Widgets. That's a much crappier situation, so careful for what you wish for
> :)


While issuing a ton of patent exclusions for something like this would be
rather poor, I would frankly rather have that then a spec that doesn't get
any attention from a party that's clearly relevant only to have patents come
up /after/ the spec is published and implemented.

>