Re: HTML5 proposes introduction of new family of URI schemes

On 2012/01/20 2:22, Eric J. Bowman wrote:
> Robin Berjon wrote:
>> How is the web platform expected to be viable if it cannot perform
>> some tasks that are trivial for installed applications? In what way
>> is this API a protocol-layer solution?
> More correctly, then, it's a wholesale change to the Web architecture
> for no reason other than "because webmail" when a browser config hasn't
> even been tried.

Browser configurations already exist. Please check your browser. But you 
may have to dig quite a bit.

> If there were some empirical evidence to point to
> showing that everyone's a numbnut who can't figure this out, different
> story, but assuming that will fail before it's been tried is putting the
> cart before the horse (greenfield solutions are the opposite of what
> standardization is about).
> All developers need is markup to declare the intent "this is an e-mail
> address" which is solved by mailto: URIs.  Why on Earth would I want to
> go back and change every static Web page I've ever put a mailto: on to
> make it some sort of interactive API which expresses "this is the same
> damn e-mail address for Gmail, this is the same damn e-mail address for
> Yahoo, this is the same damn e-mail address for standalone clients"
> etc. when all I need is to declare "this is an e-mail address" which
> is STILL the only real intent -- declaring an e-mail addy to be an e-
> mail addy.

It seems several others had the same impression, but this is wrong. 
There is absolutely no need for you to change any single "mailto:" 
URI/IRI on any single Web page you ever wrote.

Regards,    Martin.

Received on Friday, 20 January 2012 10:34:54 UTC