Perhaps there is no really good use case. But it feels right that, if you do something, there should be a way to undo it. I certainly can't see a reason why the ability to unregister would be detrimental or dangerous
Peter
On 4/24/06, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Peter Hall wrote:
> >
> > Why would, e.g., Flickr, ever unregister itself as an image/x-flickr
> > handler? (The only theoretical case I can see, namely the site
> > changing its server location, seems like a bad reason -- you should
> > always support the old location, good URIs don't change.)
>
> Perhaps a developer at Flickr made a typo...?
Sure, but in that case a simple redirect would work fine. It would be
better to do that than to require users to unregister one handler and
register another, especially given the number of prompts, etc, that would
probably be involved.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
