- From: Ian Fette <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:08:19 -0700
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Karl Dubost <karld at opera.com> wrote: > > Le 14 juil. 2011 ? 14:45, Ian Fette (????????) a ?crit : > > Many websites wish to offer a file for download, even though it could > > potentially be viewed inline (take images, PDFs, or word documents as an > > example). > > Which current websites? > > Take gmail as one example off the top of my head. If any of these files are present as an attachment I get an option to view or download. > > it seems like adding a "rel" attribute to the <a> > > tag would be a straightforward, minimally invasive way to address this > use > > case. <a rel=attachment href=blah.pdf> would indicate that the browser > > should treat this link as if the response came with a > content-disposition: > > attachment header, and offer to download/save the file for the user. > > > > Are you then proposing to reverse the contextual click on the link to give > the option, "view in the browser". All browsers have currently implemented > "save this link as"? > > It may please some users. As a user, I will place this in the category of > super annoying features. It then means I would need a preference in the > browser to disable it. > > Then it is at least 3 modifications to implement it. > Not for all links, no, only links that have rel=attachment. And I would assume that on such a link, yes, perhaps a "view inline" right click option may make sense. I wouldn't expect this to be used on anywhere near a majority of links, but an author can already try to craft a download link -- it's just that in many cases it's either requiring them to jump through hoops or impossible (e.g. offline apps). > > -- > Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/ > Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software > >
Received on Thursday, 14 July 2011 12:08:19 UTC