Re: [w3c/manifest] Add scope conflict section about same-origin and nested scopes (PR #1034)

@dmurph commented on this pull request.



> @@ -2434,6 +2434,59 @@ <h3>
           </p>
         </aside>
       </section>
+      <section class="informative">
+        <h3>
+          Web Apps with scope conflicts
+        </h3>
+        <p>
+          It is possible for two web apps to be installed where there are
+          conflicts between the scope. These conflicts come with disadvantages
+          outlined below and they are generally not recommended.
+        </p>
+        <ul>
+          <li>The scopes of the two web apps can be on the same origin. Not

Done

> +        <h3>
+          Web Apps with scope conflicts
+        </h3>
+        <p>
+          It is possible for two web apps to be installed where there are
+          conflicts between the scope. These conflicts come with disadvantages
+          outlined below and they are generally not recommended.
+        </p>
+        <ul>
+          <li>The scopes of the two web apps can be on the same origin. Not
+          recommended.
+          </li>
+          <li>The scope of one web app can be nested inside the scope of the
+          other. Strongly not recommended.
+          </li>
+          <li>The scopes of the two web apps can be the same. Strongly not

Since I removed the list, hopefully the section below reads better. I combined the 'nested' and 'matching' cases because they run into the same problems.

> +          complications of same-origin scope, along with the following UX and
+          API problems or inconsistencies among other possible consistencies:
+        </p>
+        <ul>
+          <li>Installation prompting may not work for the nested app if the
+          outer app is installed.
+          </li>
+          <li>User-agent UX around launching an app for a browsing context may
+          be inconsistent or not appear.
+          </li>
+          <li>Badging API calls will not be able to consistently update the
+          correct web app badge.
+          </li>
+          <li>Notifications may have incorrect attribution or not appear.
+          </li>
+          <li>Future APIs may not work at all in this configuration.

I tried creating a definition here. I'm wondering if we should pull this out of 'normative', and if we should maybe enumerate all APIs here that affect the web app's OS identity? e.g. badging, notifications.... those are the only two I can think of right now.

> +        <ul>
+          <li>The scopes of the two web apps can be on the same origin. Not
+          recommended.
+          </li>
+          <li>The scope of one web app can be nested inside the scope of the
+          other. Strongly not recommended.
+          </li>
+          <li>The scopes of the two web apps can be the same. Strongly not
+          recommended.
+          </li>
+        </ul>

Done

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/pull/1034#discussion_r1122422197
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/pull/1034/review/1320796534@github.com>