[whatwg] Proposal: <intent> tag for Web Intents API
jhawkins at google.com
Tue Dec 6 13:14:04 PST 2011
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:08 PM, James Graham <jgraham at opera.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Dec 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Especially changing the way <head> is parsed is hairy. Every new element
>> we introduce there will cause a <body> to be implied before it in down-level
>> clients. That's very problematic.
> Yes, I consider adding new elements to <head> to be very very bad for this
> reason. Breaking DOM consistency between supporting and non-supporting
> browsers can cause adding an intent to cause unrelated breakage (e.g. by
> changing document.body.firstChild).
Originally we envisioned using a self-closing tag placed in head for
the intent tag; however, we're now leaning towards not using
self-closing and having the tag be placed in the body with fallback
content, e.g., to install an extension to provide similar
Click here to install our extension that implements sharing!
What are your thoughts on this route?
More information about the whatwg