On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Michał Sawicz <[email protected]> wrote: > W dniu 16.12.2015 o 18:57, Olivier Tilloy pisze: >> Aside from being installed by default (and not uninstallable) and >> having a hardcoded icon to it at the top of the applications scope, >> there is nothing specific done to make webbrowser-app "default". >> >> Its desktop file contains the following line: >> >> >> MimeType=text/html;text/xml;application/xhtml+xml;x-scheme-handler/http;x-scheme-handler/https; >> >> whichs registers it with the system as a handler for http:// and >> https:// links. I suppose other browsers could do the same (just >> checked liri, and it doesn’t have such a line in its desktop file). > > Isn't it rather that .url-dispatcher file? > > /usr/share/url-dispatcher/urls/webbrowser-app.url-dispatcher
You are right of course, url-dispatcher doesn’t use the x-scheme-handler definitions from the desktop file, it has its own configuration files. >> I >> wonder what url-dispatcher would do if it encountered two apps that >> claim to be capable of handling those URLs. I guess something along >> the lines of showing a dialog to allow the user to choose which app to >> use (and maybe a checkbox to save a default choice), but I’m not sure >> whether this is implemented yet. > > Today, url-dispatcher goes for most-specific, there's no UI yet to break > a deuce, but it's been discussed as the obvious option. The liri browser doesn’t seem to be shipping a url-dispatcher config file, but I wonder what would happen if it did. What if two apps register for the "http" protocol, without further specifics? How does url dispatcher pick one over the other? -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-phone More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
