Re: [w3c/manifest] chore: refactor and export scope terms (#882)

@marcoscaceres commented on this pull request.



> @@ -522,13 +521,13 @@ <h2>
       </div>
       <p>
         If the <a>application context</a>'s <a>active document</a>'s
-        [=Document/URL=] is not <a data-lt="within-scope-manifest">within
-        scope</a> of the <a>application context</a>'s manifest, the user agent
-        SHOULD show a prominent UI element indicating the [=Document/URL=] or
-        at least its <a>origin</a>, including whether it is served over a
-        secure connection. This UI SHOULD differ from any UI used when the
-        [=Document/URL=] is <a>within scope</a>, in order to make it obvious
-        that the user is navigating off scope.
+        [=Document/URL=] is not [=within manifest scope=] of the <a>application

> How strongly do you feel about renaming this? I deliberately named this "within scope" (the same name as the other definition), designed to be a sort of C++ overloading of the name.

The rename is so it's more clear when used in other specs - want to avoid people accidentally using the wrong one ("_URL_ within scope of _other URL_" VS "within manifest scope"). When used locally, we can still do "within scope".  

-- 
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/882#discussion_r432281053