The alternative in this case would be better IPC on the iphone. My read is that the twitterific "scheme" isn't something one would use to publish on the web. Rather it's a way to hook things on the iphone so that one application can easily call a service that another application publishes. The "other" application creates an openURL handler, part of it's own application, which apparently makes the "scheme" globally accessible. -Alan On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 5:04 AM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > > Interesting. It would be useful to educate users as to why using URI > schemes like this isn't a good idea, and illustrate the alternatives > (namely, media types). I.e., > > If only we had some sort of technical architecture... board or panel (or > even group!) to help document these things for the Web... > > Seriously, though. Looking through the TAGs findings, I think most of the > relevant documents are too dense to be useful to developers like this. > > How about a "So You Want to Create a URI Scheme" guide, with practical > advice about when it's a good idea and when it's not, examples, trade-offs, > caveats, and details of what this means in *existing* code? > > Cheers, > > > On 02/10/2008, at 6:02 PM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > >> Gentlemen, >> >> load your guns. application uri schemes and posts on GET on the iPhone: >> >> http://furbo.org/2008/10/01/redacted/ >> >> //Stefan >> >> -- >> <green/>bytes GmbH, Hafenweg 16, D-48155 Münster, Germany >> Amtsgericht Münster: HRB5782 >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- > Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com > > > >
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2008 09:35:49 UTC