Not entirely true. The one drawback is that you have to
launch
*some* agent before you can find out which agent should be
handling
the URI. Plus, it's possible that said agent wants the full
response,
not just the body. So you end up with:
- User clicks http://phobos.apple.com/.
..
- Safari launches
- Safari opens the URL
- Safari realizes this URL is meant for iTunes
- iTunes launches
- iTunes opens the URL
The Safari steps (particularly expensive if it wasn't
already
running) are all avoided with the itms:// scheme hack.
Which isn't to
say it's not the wrong way to do it, but it certainly isn't
"just as
good" to rely on the MIME type.
-wsv
On Jan 12, 2007, at 1:46 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the only way they differ from
HTTP URLs is
> that Apple's software uses them to invoke a different
user agent.
> You don't need an URI scheme for that, a MIME type
works just fine
> (see, for instance, <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc4709.html#rfc.s
ection.A.2
> >).
|