Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Isolated Web Apps (Issue #842)

jyasskin left a comment (w3ctag/design-reviews#842)

After more discussion, we're seeing the IWA effort as an attempt to build an OS whose APIs
1. integrate well with the web,
2. don't duplicate capabilities that can be exposed to the web, and
3. are developed by a multi-stakeholder community with a consensus structure rather than being imposed by the OS's owner.

That's all valuable, but we suspect the TAG isn't a good group to review the resulting API proposals. In particular, the constraints on IWA installation mean that they can't really take part in the web's free linking structure even if they're built primarily using web technologies. The TAG has the most expertise looking at how the linking structure and the web's casual nature constrain APIs, and since you've removed those here, we don't expect to have a whole lot to say.

We _do_ think you should create a Community Group that's more focused than the WICG to try to collect a community around this effort. If that starts to collect another implementer and you start seeing ways to make these apps more available in a casual context, we'd be happy to take another look.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/842#issuecomment-2917031448
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/842/2917031448@github.com>