3 ms·
I completely agree. There is only one good use case for the Web Intents API: sharing. But sharing should have a simple non-generic HTML tag and JS API just for
by dfabulich 15y ago
I completely agree. There is only one good use case for the Web Intents API: sharing. But sharing should have a simple non-generic HTML tag and JS API just for that.
There's no other purpose for this unnecessarily generic API.
- kinlan 15y agohmmm - whilst sharing is defiantly one of the first and easiest use-cases to envisage, there are a whole host of other API's that will be built on this including registration for authentication (via OpenID - only present the services the user uses), cloud-based file pickers, print, send, bookmark, and in the future a lot of system generated events. The point isn't that this is an unnecessarily generic API - it is not, it is like saying postMessage is a unnecessarily generic API, rather it is firstly a service discovery mechanism and simple communication channel.