- From: Ben Francis <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 07:27:01 -0700
- To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/821/607879323@github.com>
Did anyone manage to find any data on MIME types currently being used in the wild? I remember that when we enforced a new MIME type on mozApps on Firefox OS it caused a surprising amount of pain for developers confused about why their apps didn't work, e.g. on web hosting services where the developer didn't necessarily have control over the MIME type used to serve a resource (possibly less of a problem now?). This was previously [discussed](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sysapps/2013Feb/0183.html) in the sysapps working group and I believe at the time Gecko would only enforce the MIME type for cross-origin app installs, but that was when there was an explicit `install()` API. I realise the restriction in https://github.com/w3c/manifest/pull/858 is more lenient as it appears to accept `application/json` as well, but I'm curious how many manifests are currently served with the wrong MIME type (e.g. `text/plan` or `text/html`)? Flipboard appears to use text/plain to serve https://s.flipboard.com/webapp/images/favicon/site.webmanifest for example. FWIW I don't think that enforcing a JSON MIME type is necessarily a bad idea, I'd just suggest there should probably be a warning in the specification that this is a newly enforced requirement and that some existing applications may not serve their manifest with the expected MIME type. -- 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/821#issuecomment-607879323
Received on Thursday, 2 April 2020 14:27:14 UTC