[w3c/manifest] suggest in standard calling website->webapp process unified "add to home screen" or such in all browsers (not install) (Issue #1096)

I think the wording install is so bad that I have to use a German word for it: furchtbar.
A web app will be added to home screen (even on desktop), integrated to the os and hopefully launched full screen by a headless browser.
Just like a java program runs on a jvm, a web app runs on the browser. But both the browser and the app is already there when site->app happens.

Nothing will be really installed.
Not even a service worker or offline usage is needed anymore.
If a web app is somewhat "installed", it has already happened via service worker caching before(!) adding to home screen, silently.

People hate installing things and fear it, especially from the web.
They do not understand anything what really happens so why making them fear installation when it does not even happen?
I know exactly 0% of normal people who is ready to "install" something from the web (something wicked this way comes, they all feel).

I think this "manifest" standard is what actually drives adding to home screen (or "install").
Here is defined the home screen icon file and the web app name that is shown on the home screen.
I think the **_real responsibility of this standard would be to guide the implementation_**. Icon and name may even be a one liner in a html standard (like favicon, just called appicon with a name...)

It is a very big responsibility since web apps are the future (EU law DMA will help a lot to push Apple, while Google, Microsoft are pushing web apps already).
I am following web apps since 2015 and I think the core property around which a web app should be built up and can be understood is home screen presence and full screen.
Not offline usage (developer and user decides whether to implement or whether to add/keep the web app if shitty) or os integration (the user will learn implicitly that this happens or it is needed to stop apple clearing the browser after some time without user consent) or installation (which is very bad because 1. it does not really happen 2. user fear installation and do not want to cause harm to themselves vs. harmless adding to home screen).

Also, web apps can and should be decoupled from website shortcuts.

web site shortcut:
- inside the browser
- browser tab or standalone window
- part of the bookmarking/favorites system (icon tapping UX is possible per browser with favicon, icons may should have arrows indicating: only shortcut)
- client (browser domain) data may be deleted by os (apple...)
- naming: bookmark, add to favorites, create shortcut etc.
- uses favicon

web app button:
- integrated to os
- **full screen with headless browser**, os handles it like native app
- part of the app system (home screen presence is indication)
- client (browser domain) data will never be deleted without user actively acting
- naming: add to home screen
- uses app icon and app name


I think we really have to think about actions and names that implicitly help understanding.
I am not even sure we really need words outside of developer discussions like pwa, web app or so. A web domain added to home screen which launches a full screen app like experience.
A user will learn that if it wants [outlook.com](http://outlook.com/) or [teams.com](http://teams.com/) full screen from the home screen or on desktop from the place where other apps are like the old email client or so, all it needs to do is hold the [outlook.com](http://outlook.com/) domain and the os will show the app icon that the can drop wherever he wants to. 

No need to call it anything else than drag the domain and add to home screen to get what you want.
The problem is people do not want web apps and do not explicitly understand them. They want a button and they want full screen.
I do not want to convince people to get my web app. Service worker and offline works silently and in the browser. What I want (if they want) for them to use my web domain from the home screen in full screen mode without browser UX. Because they can and it is better UX. If they want this, they implicitly want my web domain service as an app, but we do not have to make them explicitly want my web domain service as a web app... it will be clear with time implicitly what a web app is (like exta things that integarated to os and apple will not clear local database without user consent...). And people will understand that an app button and full screen usage is coupled to these properties.

The important thing is that it should be as simple as possible and not confusing.
I want a shortcut to this website in the browser: I go to the browser and use the bookmarking / favorites / shortcut system or whatever.
I want to use this website full screen and from the home screen or from other familiar (app) launcher, I drag the site and magically drop a beautiful icon on my device.

I am not sure this standard can force anything like that or if there anywhere exists an authority to force things like that.
But it would be great if we discussed somewhere how things would be best called or what logic is actually desirable to have.
A web standard is actually a must for web browsers and can be pointed to by legal authorities. Naming and unification is very important for success.

There should be very strong suggestions in this standard how to call and invoke things.
A user should have the right to add a web domain in a standardized easy way(!) to the home screen with an app icon and app name given in the "manifest" json.
Where else should something like this standardized?

I would really love to go full speed on this so that in a year or two we have a standard that can be forced with EU DMA.
Or at least when we have chromium on ios and ipados which follows from DMA, at least chromium would be perfect.
Now chromium calls "web site->web app" process "install", which is terrible/horrible/awful and logically incorrect.
You cannot nicely drag the domain name and drop an icon which is quite a good idea and could be the standard in each browser.
And there is confusion about shortcuts and co. vs add to home screen.

In this regard my suggested solution would be to make it the core requirement (and right) of web apps to run full screen like native apps. A native app does not necessarily need offline capabilities but always runs full screen.
Whereas, a web app will never run independent from the browser engine (and security) just as java needs the jvm. So it will not be installed as a native app (which suggests that it gets out of the browser and may do things that a web domain cannot: bad, bad things).

My current feeling is that this standard does a lot of unnecessary things (only icon and name are important) and most of them could be ignored or done in the service worker. But the standard does nothing about suggesting or enforcing very important things like logically correct names, guiding the icon and name to the home screen, I am not even sure there is a consensus what a web app is...

All this should be discussed, as broadly as possible, find the core properties and the path to success. My starting suggestions are above. A web app is a web domain with an icon and name added to the home screen of a operating system (without extra arrows like on linux) which is handled and integrated like native apps and run by a totally headless browser, having a responsibility for full screen navigation without browser UX. A good web app uses services workers for cashing and implements offline capabilities.

After an agreed definition this might be the right standard to layy down the suggestions for browser/os implementors to bring web apps to a successful life for the next hundreds of years...

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/1096
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/1096@github.com>