Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 14, 2024. It is now read-only.

feat(60/STATUS-URL-SCHEME): initial draft #602

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

felicio
Copy link

@felicio felicio commented May 15, 2023

Moved from status-im/specs#159

@felicio
Copy link
Author

felicio commented May 15, 2023

Cannot add reviewers, so please

To @rymnc @saledjenic @cammellos @iurimatias

@felicio felicio changed the title feat(59/STATUS-URL-SCHEME): initial draft feat(60/STATUS-URL-SCHEME): initial draft May 15, 2023
@fryorcraken fryorcraken requested a review from kaiserd May 16, 2023 05:54
@fryorcraken
Copy link
Contributor

This is very raw, little context or information is provided in the RFC.


# References

- [59/STATUS-URL-DATA](/spec/59/)
Copy link
Author

@felicio felicio May 16, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See #600

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This reference should be used somewhere in the text.

I assume /59 specifies the encoding which is used to encode the URL scheme specified in this doc?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is very raw

@fryorcraken and what do you suggest?

  1. Merge it with feat(59/STATUS-URL-DATA): initial draft #600?
  2. Extend it for deep link implementations after
    a. Use https:// deep links instead of status-im:// - Windows status-im/status-desktop#9549
    b. Use https:// deep links instead of status-im:// - MacOS status-im/status-desktop#7957
    c. Make deep links work for Linux status-im/status-desktop#8027
  3. Else?

This should grow with more paths being supported post MVP, and personally I wouldn't mind keeping it separate, simple and serve more as an overview with references.

Comment on lines 41 to 49
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<data>#<signature>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<compressed_user_public_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/<data>#<signature>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<compressed_community_public_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/<data>#<signature>`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<compressed_community_public_key>` | |
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<data>#<signature>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<compressed_user_public_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/<data>#<signature>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<compressed_community_public_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/<data>#<signature>`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<compressed_community_public_key>` | |
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<encoded_data>#<encoded_signature_and_user_chat_key>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<user_chat_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/< encoded_data >#<encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<community_chat_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/< encoded_data >#< encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key >`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<community_chat_key>` | |

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But if other implementations can prove this change is redundant, please let me know asap.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Co-authored-by: Felicio Mununga <felicio@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@kaiserd kaiserd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with @fryorcraken , this spec would need more context.

Afaict, it can stay a separate RFC.
I should specify deep links, but not OS specific implementation details.
You could mention implementation suggestions.

serve more as an overview with references.

In this case, the document should be Informational.
However, from what I understood so far, it would make sense to keep it as Standards Track,
and specify the URL scheme for deep linking content.

(my feeback on /59 is similar, also lacks context)

slug: 60
title: 60/STATUS-URL-SCHEME
name: Status URL Scheme
status: draft
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
status: draft
status: raw

### Related scope

#### Features

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These features would need more context. E.g. what is an onboarding website, etc.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.


# Abstract

This document describes URL scheme for previewing and deep linking content as well as for triggering actions.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
This document describes URL scheme for previewing and deep linking content as well as for triggering actions.
This document specifies an URL scheme for previewing and deep linking content as well as for triggering actions.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Assuming this RFC is planned to grow into a normative specification.


# References

- [59/STATUS-URL-DATA](/spec/59/)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This reference should be used somewhere in the text.

I assume /59 specifies the encoding which is used to encode the URL scheme specified in this doc?

Comment on lines 41 to 49
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<encoded_data>#<encoded_signature_and_user_chat_key>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<user_chat_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/< encoded_data >#<encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<community_chat_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/< encoded_data >#< encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key >`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<community_chat_key>` | |
Copy link
Author

@felicio felicio Jul 28, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<encoded_data>#<encoded_signature_and_user_chat_key>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<user_chat_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/< encoded_data >#<encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<community_chat_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/< encoded_data >#< encoded_signature_and_community_chat_key >`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<community_chat_key>` | |
| Name | Url | Description |
| ----- | ---- | ---- |
| User profile | `/u/<encoded_data>#<user_chat_key>` | Preview/Open user profile |
| | `/u#<user_chat_key>` | |
| | `/u#<ens_name>` | |
| Community | `/c/<encoded_data>#<community_chat_key>` | Preview/Open community |
| | `/c#<community_chat_key>` | |
| Community channel | `/cc/<encoded_data>#<community_chat_key >`| Preview/Open community channel |
| | `/cc/<channel_uuid>#<community_chat_key>` | |

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See status-im/status-web#459 as to why.

@jimstir
Copy link
Contributor

jimstir commented Feb 29, 2024

Continue discussion: vacp2p/rfc-index#14

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants