On Mar 23, 2012, at 8:09 AM, Adrienne Porter Felt wrote: > I do think that having the concept of installation has nice security > properties because there are some capabilities that the user should not be > prompted about, but not every single website should have (it would be > annoying). > > However, one aspect of the user experience worries me. When someone is > given a link to Facebook.com/whatever/foo/bar.php, and the user has the app > installed, which opens? The app or the site? It seems like it is > undesirable for there to be two versions of the same "web presence" for the > user to choose between; and one is more powerful but maybe doesn't > understand normal links. > > (I'm sorry if this has already been discussed, the previous thread was too > long for me to read it all.)
That's an excellent question, and I don't think that's been discussed so far. I doubt we'd implicitly assume that a URL that a user clicks on (in an email or browser for example) and map it to an application. What's more likely is that apps may want for register as handlers for some sort of app launch scheme. Lucas. _______________________________________________ dev-security mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security
