With regards to Atom feeds:
The difference between a link type and a data type is that a data type
transfers data (e.g. a response's body) to another app, while a link
type transfers the link itself.
Further - and more importantly, if you use content negotiation to detect
a browser (in order to show an actual webpage), then you cannot open the
link in a feed reader. Your only option is to make a link that nobody
can share (because you can't know if your friend has a feed reader
installed), and then have everyone share the website. At that point, why
even have a feed? it's not like web browsers would tell you about the
feed either (anymore).
It's true that Atom feeds allow/recommend to include a link back to the
feed in the feed itself, which works around the problem of "the response
body isn't a link", but it just falls apart with content negotiation/the
desire to have the same link work on both.
On 2024-02-23 11:34, Elsie Hupp wrote:
I have an iPhone (which I dutifully hate), and part of how deep-linking URL
handlers work is that there is a popup prompt directly *asking the user*
whether they want to allow a particular app to open the URL, with options like
“Yes”, “No”, “Always”, and “Never”, more or less in the same way that the
operating system prompts the user whether or not they want to allow an
application to receive the pasted contents of the clipboard.
In other words, I assume the way deep-linking URL handlers would work in an XDG
setting would be with Flatpak portals, which are generally implemented with
this sort of prompt.
As for things like Atom feeds… wouldn’t these have a MIME type? If so, wouldn’t
this already be handled by a given web browser’s MIME type handling? In the
context of Flatpak portals, then, I assume there is already something along the
lines of which application should be summoned to handle a given data type and
whether it should be able to do so without user confirmation (i.e.
“Yes”/“No”/“Always”/“Never”).
Anyway, yes, Flatpak is an XDG standard, but they might have their own mailing
list that might be more useful for requesting a feature such as this:
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/flatpak
Hope this is helpful!
Elsie Hupp
> On Feb 12, 2024, at 8:35 AM, Soni L. wrote:
>
> what would deep linking (like the android/ios feature) look like for the free desktop?
>
> obviously the android/ios feature is explicitly designed to restrict the kinds of apps that can be deep link handlers (so e.g. only the official twitter app can handle twitter links), which seems very anti-free desktop. so what would a free desktop alternative look like?
>
> the point of deep links is that the same link works both in the browser and in an app.
>
> also, would it be possible to extend them to, say, atom feeds? those traditionally only open in an app, but it'd be neat if they could also open in the browser.
>
> (disclaimer: we make fedilinks https://fedilinks.org/ and it is our goal to become this, our goal is to be "deep linking for the free desktop". but alternative proposals are welcome.)
