- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:12:16 +0200
- To: Rodrigo Polo <rodrigo.polo@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
On 2013-06-05 14:00, Rodrigo Polo wrote: > You are completely right, but in the tests I made on Chrome the "geo" > URI handler can't be used with the "registerProtocolHandler" call, > it throws a security error and the use of geo location URI it is not > included as a "recommendation" or "good practice" when we talk about the > markup, so it is not a technical thing, it is more an idea that could be > included in further discussions between web browsers developers, map app > developers and the users so everyone adopt the idea of having the geo > URI scheme adopted as an standard, I'm quite sure this idea can help a > lot of users and web developers to give a better user experience and it > is more important that many other things, it will make the life of users > a lot easier. > ... You don't *need* registerProtocolHandler to support "geo:". Just install an OS-level application that handles "geo:" and you are done. That being said: I agree that "geo:" should be added to the white list so that browser-based handlers for "geo:" become possible. Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 12:13:00 UTC