- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:23:04 +0100 (CET)
On Tue, 6 Dec 2011, James Hawkins wrote: > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:14 PM, James Hawkins <jhawkins at google.com> wrote: >>> Originally we envisioned using a self-closing tag placed in head for >>> the intent tag; however, we're now leaning towards not using >>> self-closing and having the tag be placed in the body with fallback >>> content, e.g., to install an extension to provide similar >>> functionality. >>> >>> <intent action="webintents.org/share"> >>> ?Click here to install our extension that implements sharing! >>> </intent> >>> >>> What are your thoughts on this route? >> >> So, when the <intent> tag is supported, it's not displayed at all, and >> instead solely handled by the browser? ?This seems okay to me. >> > > Correct. > This seems to remove my major objection to the new tag design.
Received on Tuesday, 6 December 2011 13:23:04 UTC