Re: [w3c/manifest] Clarify behaviour of a page linking to a manifest that is not within scope of that manifest (#784)

A counter here is that instead of fully invalidating the manifest, we should just invalidate the URL-based members:

- `start_url`
- `scope`
- `shortcuts`
- `share_target` (incubation)
- `file_handlers` (incubation)
- `protocol_handlers` (incubation)

The rationale is that it's valid to have a manifest with, say, just a title and icon, to add metadata to your site. That manifest would have no `start_url` or `scope`, and thus not be subject to purging by the above same-origin check. If you then added a `scope` to the manifest which disagrees with the document origin, we would then start ignoring its icons. That doesn't seem right.

So it seems better to just do the same-origin check, and if it fails, abandon any members that contain URLs that are required to be in scope. (Icon URLs are not required to be in scope so they would stay.)

-- 
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/784#issuecomment-653379638