Re: [w3c/manifest] The new definition of "installable web application" is inconsistent with the normative text of the specification (Issue #1168)

benfrancis left a comment (w3c/manifest#1168)

@dmurph wrote:
> It sounds like we have a disagreement in use-cases then (should any site be installable as an app, vs not).

Yes, perhaps we disagree on whether "installing" websites without a Web App Manifest should fall within the scope of the Web App Manifest specification. That's a bit of a philosophical discussion about whether all websites are web apps, or whether web apps are a subset of websites which are expected to behave and be used in a different way (separate from a web browser).

But more importantly the current definition is just internally inconsistent within the specification and has significant bugs that would need to be fixed in order for it to be true. "Any website is an installable web application" is more of an aspiration than a statement of fact at this point, but is being quoted as an established consensus.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/1168#issuecomment-6188673409
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/1168/6188673409@github.com>