On Dec 10, 1:34 pm, Aaron Boodman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ojan brought this up before, but I think it's a good idea, so I'll
> > evangelize it some more. Instead of requiring the extension developer
> > to come up with an extension ID (com.google.myextension), use
> > templating to automatically substitute a guaranteed unique ID where
> > needed. The template substitution would be done in the browser
> > process before we handed the script off to a renderer. Examples:
> > - img.src = "${EXTENSION_URL}/foo.gif";
> > - var extension = new chromium.Extension("${EXTENSION_ID}");
>
> It is a good idea. Part of the reason I brought back the short ID was
> we found two places it was useful (here, and as a name for
> directories) and I was worried we were going to keep coming up with
> examples like that.
I don't think we necessarily need the ID to be the public key. It can
be any random unique string.
Also, does it matter what the directory name is? Firefox has crazy
GUID strings for extension directories. I imagine we can do something
similar.
> Also, it seems like using a public key as an ID is
> overkill in case we ever have SSL-served extensions.
I think that's one of the advantages of the templating system. If
it's an SSL-served extension, "${EXTENSION_URL}" would be
https://myextension.com/foo, and it would transparently work.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Chromium-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
