W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2015

Re: [whatwg] New approach to activities/intents

From: Nils Dagsson Moskopp <nils@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 02:40:02 +0100
To: rescator@emsai.net, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Message-ID: <87h9w2aw3x.fsf@dieweltistgarnichtso.net>
Roger Hågensen <rescator@emsai.net> writes:

> On 2014-11-10 10:35, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Roger Hågensen <rescator@emsai.net> wrote:
>>> A worthy goal would be to help developers de-clutter websites from all those
>>> share icons we see today, so if this could be steered towards that it would
>>> be great.
>> That is what the proposal is doing. The share button would be part of
>> the browser UI. Perhaps you misunderstood it?
>> (However, it is unclear whether all domains are interested in such a migration.)
> I must have miss-understood, I saw window.close() mentioned and I 
> thought this was a javascript API suggestion for yet another way to 
> sharing things.
> I looked a bit close now and wonder if this is related in any way to 
> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/Archive/Sharing ?
> Do you plan to go for a OpenShare route (modeled after OpenSearch) or 
> something simpler like I mentioned earlier?
> If all a web author need to do is slap a rel="share" on a <a> tag or a 
> <link> tag in the head and then have it automatically appear/listed in a 
> browser Share UI for that page then that would be ideal in my
> oppinion.

For the record: Every browser has a “Share UI” already. It is called the
address bar. You do not need to do anything to opt into it besides using
URLs. Granted, lots of hipster developers bend around backwards to avoid
using URLs, but to me it seems you already have a usable mechanism.

May I ask if the “share” idea is conflating mechanism and policy?

> Something like a OpenShare could build further on this hopefully, but 
> for wide adoption the simpler the better.
> Also OpenSearch is for searching an entire site or parts of it, wile a 
> OpenShare would be just for one page or link so that would be overkill 
> and it would cause another HTTP request to occur which is a waste IMO.
> I'm also curious if any browsers actually do something if multiple 
> rel="bookmark" exist in a page (head and body), are they taken into 
> account in the Bookmark UI at all? I certainly can not recall eve seeing 
> this happen.
> A quick test in Chrome, Firefox, Opera, IE here with the following in 
> <head>:
> <link href="http://example.com/test3" rel="bookmark" title="Test 3">
> <link href="http://example.com/test4" rel="bookmark" title="Test 4">
> And the following in <body>;
> <a href="http://example.com/test!" rel="bookmark" title="Test 1">Click 
> Here1</a>
> <a href="http://example.com/test2" rel="bookmark" title="Test 2">Click 
> Here2</a>
> <a href="http://example.com/test0" title="Test 0">Click Here0</a>
> The result is the same, if I use the Browser UI bookmark then the head 
> links are ignored, and if I right link the body a link then I'm not 
> given a bookmark choice at all, just copy the url or save it.
> If bookmark is so ignored perhaps it would be best to take bookmark (and 
> to some extent canonical) and roll that into a rel="share" standard 
> which is defined/tied to this activities/intent proposal?
> Note! Firefox allows right clicking any URL and choosing to Bookmark it, 
> and IE does the same but it called Favorites there instead, in either 
> case I assume that rel=bookmark is ignored and the title is also ignored 
> as the "test0" link which does not specify rel bookmark is treated 
> identically to them. Opera and Chrome does not seem to allow right 
> clicking a URL and bookmark it. As I do not have Safari I have no idea 
> what it does in these cases.
> -- 
> Roger "Rescator" Hågensen.
> Freelancer - http://www.EmSai.net/

Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann
Received on Thursday, 8 January 2015 02:26:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:32 UTC