[whatwg] Proposal: <intent> tag for Web Intents API
paulkinlan at google.com
Fri Dec 16 14:13:56 PST 2011
I know James mentioned  that we are leaning towards having the tag
in the body which opens up the possibility of unsuported browsers
showing the content of the element. This had some general consensus
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Adam Barth <w3c at adambarth.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Paul Kinlan <paulkinlan at google.com> wrote:
>> There isn't always a href, if left out the value action should be
>> launched on the current page.
>> We didn't want to add additional attributes to the meta tag or link
>> tag just for intents, this seems to open up the flood gates for future
>> platform features to also extend the meta syntax, the meta element
>> then just becomes a dumping ground. If the answer when defining a new
>> declarative standardized platform feature is to just arbitrarily add
>> new attributes to the meta data element we will get to a point where
>> either we have attributes that are used in multiple contexts or use
>> of basic attribute name spacing such as "intent-".
>> Looking at the spec it appears there would still be a relatively
>> large change to the html5 spec to accomodate these new attributes and
>> conditional parsing guidelines.
>> A new tag is simple, concise and encapsulates the features and
>> requirements of the new platform feature and gives us scope to iterate
>> for future versions without stepping on the toes of the other features
>> that might use the meta tag.
> Does that mean you're not interested in declaring this information in
> the <head> ?
>>  http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#the-meta-elemen
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk at opera.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:05:37 +0100, Greg Billock <gbillock at google.com> wrote:
>>>> The big ergonomic sticking point there is probably the |href|
>>>> attribute, which we envision
>>>> being able to do same-origin registration. Perhaps a similar <link
>>>> rel="intent"> tag
>>>> modification would be able to do that, though. Is that what you'd
>>>> suggest? Do you think
>>>> having two tags involved would be confusing?
>>> If there's always an href attribute you could just go for <link> instead. I think you should go for one element and just add attributes as required. And if we want to put inside <head> that would be either <meta> or <link>.
>>> Anne van Kesteren
>> Paul Kinlan
>> Developer Advocate @ Google for Chrome and HTML5
>> G+: http://plus.ly/paul.kinlan
>> t: +447730517944
>> tw: @Paul_Kinlan
>> LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/paulkinlan
>> Blog: http://paul.kinlan.me
>> Skype: paul.kinlan
Developer Advocate @ Google for Chrome and HTML5
More information about the whatwg