protocol handling spec?
dave at cridland.net
Mon Aug 9 13:02:02 EEST 2004
On Mon Aug 9 10:25:28 2004, Lars Hallberg wrote:
> As a user, i want the protocol to matter for witch app to start.
> Probably it's enuf for me to be able to say - for this protocol,
> *always* use this app.
Yes, the scheme can be the only thing to look at. 'telnet' and
'mailto', for instance, are likely to always start the same
'http', 'file', and 'imap' needn't, though - 'file' for the
'localhost' case is very unlikely to do so, in particular.
So I agree it's useful to be able to specify that, but I disagree
that this is all that's needed.
> For exampel, I want gqview to start for jpeg images genaraly, but
> if it's a http uri I want firefox to start, so I esaly can brows
> related pages. I want firwfox even if it is a mediatype firefox
> don't handel internaly, just to get the dialogbox asking me wheter
> to download or start the 'normal' mimetype viewer! Becose all
> viewer don't have a 'save as' facility, and some viewers freqvently
> crach. If I download the file, I can try different viewers!
What if it's an http URI referencing a DAV folder, or a Subversion
Certainly an HTTP client has to start somewhere, because otherwise we
don't know anything about the resource, but I'm not convinced that
the client must always be a web browser, nor indeed the final viewer.
URIs are vaguely like filenames, but the problem is that there are no
generic actions to apply. You can't 'View' or 'Edit' a mailto scheme
URI, for instance, and schemes such as 'imap' have two very different
modes of access, since they can refer to a server, folder, or search
(which are not file-like, and hence require an MUA), or a message or
section (which are, and could be launched using a suitable viewer for
More information about the xdg