Talk:Link2SMS - a protocol handling example
Hamishwillee - Let me know when you're done and I'll subedit.Looks promising
05:25, 15 November 2012 (EET)
Ltomuta - @HamishThis is as ready as it will ever be. Thanks for offering to improve its style and feel free to make whatever changes needed.
09:10, 23 November 2012 (EET)
Hamishwillee - Subedited - please check
Makes sense, well written, useful. I've subedited, with following changes FYI only:
- Restructured - all problem statement in introduction, separate sections for protocol specification and "handling the SMS URI". Makes it easier to understand at high level
- Added links to API reference on first mention of API items. Subsequent mentions are marked up using Icode template
- I've made the "how to customise for yourself" as asides as this is otherwise very SMS centric
- Added NFC category. Removed draft category
In terms of "thoughts for improvement" it would be great if we could
- link to documents on what protocols already exist
- Make a statement that you can't implement a protocol that already exists/is supported, and what happens if you do
- link to official docs (if there are anything) on protocols
- I have a feeling that a protocol handler should also supply icons for the protocol. Worth checking, and covering if it must. Could be wrong.
- there other ways to launch URI - will your handling cover these cases? In particular an app might also need to handle starting from a deep link/tile notification, and its probably good to note how (or that) your approach will work with these.
- Guidelines make statement that since any parameters can be passed your protocol needs to be tough enough to cope with "bad parameters". Just throwing it in - possibly additional advice you should provide, maybe in another section "Writing your own protocol"
Lastly, I really like titles which include the development framework. Maybe "Link2SMS Protocol handling example on Windows Phone". YOur call, I admit it is clunky.
In terms of the competition I like this example. I'm not sure how innovative it is, or whether it is comprehensive (e.g. if icons are required or of interest, then that should be covered). I do think it is very clear though.
08:18, 26 November 2012 (EET)