- From: Matt Giuca <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:39:25 +0000 (UTC)
- To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2017 06:39:53 UTC
Hi, Owen just showed this to me. Sorry, I didn't know of its existence until now. @dominickng and I just had a detailed discussion about it. Unfortunately I ran out of time to type up my thoughts on this today, and have to run now. We are supportive of doing this but there are some high-level conceptual issues, as well as syntax issues, that I think we should resolve before even considering the spec language. We should first decide what format we want the manifest to take, and what the semantics should be, *then* we can codify it in spec language. So I will avoid doing a code review on the text for now. I will write up the details tomorrow. -- 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/pull/563#issuecomment-350959392
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2017 06:39:53 UTC