Re: [w3c/manifest] Bring back "serviceworker" member (#864)

I'd be inclined to initially go with:

> 1. `serviceworker` inside the Payment manifest.

As an extension to web manifest spec. 

However, rationale and issues for why we removed `serviceworker` in the first place remain (the declarative model being somewhat inflexible).

There are also some unresolved/premature presuppositions around "JIT" installation payment handlers, which don't have multivendor consensus in the Payments WG. IMO, although there are some excellent ideas underpinning payment handler JIT, it would be premature to codify those in a standard without support from a second implementation (particularly because there are still concerns regarding privacy/security of arbitrarily installing these payment handlers in a JIT-manner).


-- 
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/864#issuecomment-626460428