Re: [w3c/manifest] Manifest processing should not be a function of document URL (#668)

@benfrancis wrote:

> My understanding of Progressive Web Apps is that they are all about web apps escaping web browsers. Restricting the scope of the specification to the context of a web browser would seem to fail to meet that primary use case.

Note that this effort predates that write up, and I don't think there was every wholesale endorsement of PWAs as outlined in that blog post by the standards community (or browser vendors at large). As aspirational a guide as that blog post has been to the community, there are a lot of dissenting opinions, and in some cases, outright rejections, of what is proposes. 

Without digressing too much, from the very beginning, the way we designed the "progressive" nature of this particular specification was that developers could add as few or as many manifest members as they wanted in their manifest, without any strict requirement on what they must include. 
 
> I therefore agree in principle with the statement "manifest processing should not be a function of document URL", though in practice untangling the two at this stage would be challenging. Proposals like the proposed approach to unique IDs would further complicate this.

Agree. And at this point in this nearly decade long journey, I'd really just like to get the unified base set of functionality standardized. It is, admittedly, a somewhat impoverished subset of the functionality web developers need - but I'm optimistic that we can continue to evolve this specification, along with implementations, in unison. 

But I really just want to get the core of it "done" - so we can then incrementally standardize little enhancements to make everyone's lives better. 

-- 
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/668#issuecomment-796453398