Re: [manifest] Handleing capabilities with Manifoldjs (#412)

Thanks for the input, @kenchris originally the idea was we were meeting the needs of the window platform and being able to turn on the API access, since that was the only platform that had it.  We now are looking at adding api access for other platforms so it seems like you all might agree it needs to be treated differently than the access uRLs.  This is what we are thinking right now.  separate them into different values:

mjs_extended_scope:  This is an array, which we really think is what scope should be in the spec.  many web apps contain multiple domains, here is an example: http://www.foxnews.com/manifest.json  however we don't want to messy the waters by tying this to api access.

msj_api_access:  this will be an array of urls that have API access. maybe we can allow a wildcard here to indicate that all urls in the extended scope should get api access.  Open to thoughts.

@anssiko we don't want these to be confused with CSP, and i think we need to address CSP directly to encourage developers to utilize it.  This was just about identifying scope.  Unfortunately in current version for iOS / Android you needed to list domains (or URLs) that you were pulling any files from.  I think we will be able to fix this in next version so it works the same on all platforms.
@kenchris @anssiko   For msj_custom_scripts it is really similar to a grease monkey solution, difference being it's for the app builder, not the end user.  mjs_import_scripits is a better name, we'll use that.  I also agree that we need to remove the platforms, that seems to encourage browser detection as apposed to feature detection.  I don't want to be an encourager of anything that looks similar to it.  src will also be used for refs.  What do you think?

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/412#issuecomment-157323788