Re: [w3c/manifest] scope_extensions unreasonably prevents installation of multiple PWAs (Issue #1209)

AshleyScirra left a comment (w3c/manifest#1209)

My view is that it is not appropriate to show "open in app" for origins in scope_extensions - the way I look at it, the primary scope is the app, and scope_extensions are other things that can also be counted as in-scope to the app. This is the case for both the examples I gave - for example it wouldn't be appropriate to offer to open docs.example.com in the editor.example.com app, it just happens to be an additional scope of the app which actually lives at editor.example.com. However that appears to be the current design, which I don't think makes sense.

Perhaps the simplest solution is if there is both the option to show "open in app" and "install app", just show "install app".

I suppose others out there might have actual PWAs that truly operate across multiple origins, but that seems a weird thing to do - how would you manage permissions, storage, authentication and such? It seems to just be a way to make life a lot harder. If that is something people really do, then I guess we could do something like a separate `allowed_navigations` field (option 2), which I think is the same thing as you were getting at. But if in practice nobody makes truly cross-origin PWAs, I think it would be simpler to just say the primary scope is the app, and `scope_extensions` are extra places the app is allowed to navigate to but don't count as actually being the app (option 1). (But then maybe it should have been called `allowed_navigations` in the first place...)

Another idea is perhaps to add a "type" field to entries in `scope_extensions`. The default could be "app" meaning the additional origins count as part of the PWA itself. A new option could then be added like "navigate" that allows navigating to those origins in the installed PWA without looking like they are out of scope, but not counting as the app for "install as app" or "open in app" purposes.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/1209#issuecomment-4081814507
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/1209/4081814507@github.com>