Re: [w3c/manifest] Editorial: Refine the definition of an installable web application (PR #1164)

benfrancis left a comment (w3c/manifest#1164)

@christianliebel It's cool if the browser vendors at TPAC 2023 were able to reach a consensus of some kind (though I can't see a clear consensus or resolution in those meeting notes), but as an implementer what I'm saying is that the current text of the specification seems nonsensical because it appears to contradict itself.

If an "installed" web application is one where a web application manifest has been applied to a top level browsing context to create an application context, then how can a website without a manifest be "installable"?

Apart from this, in both theory and practice, there is a difference between creating a bookmark to a single URL which opens in a browser tab with an unbounded navigation scope, and creating an app launcher which launches a standalone application context (usually presented like a native app window) with a manifest applied to all URLs which fall within its navigation scope.

Putting aside the constraints of the current UI paradigms of Android and iOS and the terms "add to homescreen" vs. "install", under the current specification it's not possible to create an application context without a manifest, and it's not possible to process a manifest without both a document URL and a manifest URL.

So how do you get from a website with no manifest to an "installed" web application? What am I missing?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/pull/1164#issuecomment-2688586753
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/pull/1164/c2688586753@github.com>