Re: [w3c/manifest] Support a way to update explicilty (#446)

I'm sorry but I think of myself as a pretty "experienced" web user and I definitely don't consider, the fact that a browser indicates to me a page is being fetched and loaded, as a hint that that the underlying content has changed. I think that is over-reaching a little.

Are you suggesting that an average user of the web understands the difference between a page loaded from the cache and one fetched from the Web and ALSO understands that the latter MAY mean the code of the Web page is different to the last time they loaded that page?

The fact that `start_url` can change is the only reason all this complex change control is required at all. Wouldn't it be better to bind a manifest to a `start_url`?

Perhaps if you could answer my initial question it would help me understand this better:

> What is the logic a user agent should apply to decide if the installation of one manifest is actually a new install or an update/replacement of an existing one? It would seem that this should be related to scope but I'm not sure if that's explicitly defined anywhere?

It seems to me that it's possible to have a URL that falls under overlapping scopes of two different manifests. In which case, if I land on that URL, which application-context, if any, is loaded?

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/446#issuecomment-207903776