Hacker News Reader

Comment by maephet | Hacker News Reader

I work at Branch (referenced in the NYT article) which tries to make it way easier for mobile devs to leverage better deep links to stuff in their apps.

Making the analogy to desktop apps is fair, but I think the better question would be why not? The URI scheme registration mechanism in Android and iOS allow the dev to create a new OS level namespace for his or her app and all 'pages' inside. For example, http:// is the scheme for browser app based addresses just as venmo:// is the scheme to address all payments or user profiles in the Venmo app. Why not leverage this technology to make app content more open and easier to access?

Now, if we could just get rid of the app store enforced install process and have apps automatically retrieved and cached, things would be a lot smoother...

View on HN

> Now, if we could just get rid of the app store enforced install process and have apps automatically retrieved and cached, things would be a lot smoother...

I totally see what you did there ;). http://xkcd.com/1367/

I feel the lack of linking in apps is done partially because of laziness, and partially on purpose. Most apps that are neither games nor utilities seem to be made to control the viewing experience and/or help the authors trick the users into parting with their money. Increasing interoperability seems to be counterproductive if the only reason for your app to exist is to earn a quick buck from the less savvy users.

We just discovered that one a few weeks ago - It was then we realized that we had just dedicated our lives to the premise of an xkcd comic

I disagree with your last comment as you could make the same argument for websites in general - there will always be spectrum of usefulness/scamminess. Utilities or games might not have the concept of 'pages' as a news app or a social photo upload app, but imagine being able to link to specific constellations in the star chart app, the various calculator faces of some popular calculator apps, or a user's city in Clash of Clans. It's going to be awesome.

"imagine being able to link to specific constellations in the star chart app, the various calculator faces of some popular calculator apps, or a user's city in Clash of Clans. It's going to be awesome."

I'm imagining it, and in most of those cases I'm imagining the horrible fragmentation clusterfk that will have to be solved in Yavascript - linking to "some popular calculator apps" (plural) means either providing a mess of links for the user to decide, or somehow guessing which one to show.

Two alternatives that both land in the "NAH GANNA HAPPEN" category:

* "everybody agree on a standard prefix for basic things like calculators" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

* "allow client JS to detect installed apps" see also the detect-visited-sites-with-CSS info leakage for why this would be terrible...

     "everybody agree on a standard prefix for basic things 
     like calculators" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's a URN. Unfortunately they never really got adopted. But thy solve this exact problem.

urn:calc:rpn

You click the link and your mobile phone then looks to see if any of your calculator apps satisfy that urn.

If they find any they open it up or present the user with a choice between them or open the one the user configured as their choice.

If they don't find any they check the app store or web and offer the user the opportunity to install one that satisfies that urn.

Actually this is exactly what androids intents do as well minus the app search and install. But I don't think they use urns under the hood.

I was actually going to reply something along the same lines. These sorts of services exist on both iOS and Android (can't speak to Windows Phone). Not for the provided example, but for Android, the Intents like you mentioned, and iOS has a similar concept for things like "Apps that are capable of routing/mapping" and possibly other things. Neither of these are done through the example "standard prefix," but both are through by adding some standard permission or key to your app.

>I totally see what you did there

...except the main cache on a web browser is nothing more than a speed boost, and cannot be relied on.

Hence Service Workers: http://www.w3.org/TR/service-workers/

I'm familiar with the linking capabilities of apps, at least for iOS (haven't played with Android). I think it's a bit limited, as it currently stands, but I feel like the intent of the url schemes is somewhat different from the idea of linking on the web. On the web, you typically link to open content, whereas I feel like apps tend to be more personalized; seems like linking wouldn't work quite the same. Interested to think more about that, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com