W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2015

[manifest] Manifest for web application; review ...

From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 17:58:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CACsW8eG+xdf=EBn6CrNQ-rGai=OR4a3Wc971bNU3C+ZS7LwC6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-appmanifest-20150212/

> However, installed web applications and their data could be seen as "high value" (particulaly [sic] from a privacy perspective).

> For instance, the web application:
> contains a manifest with at least a name member and a suitable icon.
...
> has been explicitly marked by the user as one that they value and trust (e.g., by bookmarking or "staring" it).

Drop:
> And so on...
... it isn't a "for instance".

> has been explicitly marked by the user as one that they value and trust (e.g., by bookmarking or "staring" [sic] it).

"starring"

> If the URL being navigated to is not within scope of the navigation scope,

`being navigated to` is awkward.

> then the user agent MUST behave as if the application context is not allowed to navigate:

The `:` here is odd.

> this provides the ability for the user agent to perform the navigation in a different browsing context
> - or in a different user agent entirely.

> If during the handle redirects step of HTML's navigate algorithm,
> if the redirect URL is not within scope,

You can drop the second `if`, you're in an `If`.

> abort HTML's navigation algorithm with a SecurityError.


> In such a case, the manifest is applied to all URLs the application context is navigated to (see related security considerations).

The parenthetical should link somewhere. (Even if it's just the next section)


> In particular, if a scope member is declared in the manifest,
> it is not possible to navigate the top-level browsing context to somewhere outside the scope while the manifest is being applied.

`is being` is awkward, you should be able to drop `being`.

> The concept of a deep link is useful in that it allows hyperlinking from one installed application to another.

There should be a red warning to people that this can happen and thus
that they shouldn't assume that such a navigation was intentionally
initiated by the user for the purpose they think it was ....
(This may be obvious to you/me, but it won't be to developers)

> Each display mode, except browser, has a recursive fallback display mode, which is the display mode that the user agent can try to use if it doesn't support a particular display mode.

recursive => iterative (?) -- it isn't really recursing, it just has a fallback.

> 7.4 icons member
> Otherwise, if unprocessed icons is not undefined:
> Issue a developer warning that the type is not supported.

If this path isn't an extension point, then having it return early (as
in 7.3 scope member) would be easier to read.

> If value is not part of the display modes values , issue a developer warning that the value is unsupported.

There's a stray whitespace before `,`

> 7.5 display member

> If Type(value) is not "string" or value is not part of the display modes values:

You didn't "Trim" before performing the "part of" (undefined)
operation (you trim below):

> Otherwise, Trim(value) and set value to be the result.

> The possible values is one of the OrientationLockType enum defined in [SCREEN-ORIENTATION].

is one => are those

> 7.7 start_url member

> A user agent MAY also allow the end-user to modify the URL when, for instance, a bookmark for the web application is being create [sic] or any time thereafter.

create => created

> If type is not "string" or value is the empty string, then:
> If type is not "undefined", issue a developer warning that the type is unsupported.

what if { start_url: " " } ?
(I suppose it could be technically valid, although I question that...)

> If type is not "string" or value is the empty string, then:
> If url is failure:

you inconsistently use `, then`

> 8. Icon object and its members
> For all intents and purposes, an icon object is functionally equivalent to link element whose rel attribute is icon in a Document.

should `icon` be quoted/marked up?

> For example, the following policy restricts loading icons the icons.example.com domain. Thus, trying to load icons from "other.com" would fail.

I can't follow this example, could you please provide an example
manifest URL for the example?

> 8.2 density member
> The algorithm thanks [sic] an icon object as an argument and returns a positive number.

You're welcome.

> 1.1 Return 1.0.
> 4.1 Issue a developer warning.
> 4.2 Let result be 1.0.

Any particular reason to Let instead of Return? (you returned earlier)

> 5 Return result.

> 8.3 sizes member

> When multiple icon objects are available,
> a user agent can use the value to decide which icon is most suitable for a display context

Any reason this is `can` instead of `may`?


> 4 If type is not "string", then:
> 4.1 If type is not "undefined", issue a developer warning that the type is unsupported.

Normally you return, why not here?

> 8.4 src member
> Let value be the result of calling the [[GetOwnProperty]] internal method of icon passing "src" as the argument.
> Let type be Type(value).
> If type is not "string",
> or value is the empty string, then:
^ this specific or branch isn't really necessary, one could just fall
through to the Trim path...
> If type is not "undefined", issue a developer warning that the type is unsupported.
> Return undefined.
> If Trim(value) is the empty string, then return undefined.

(I didn't read past this point)
Received on Monday, 1 June 2015 21:58:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:31 UTC