[w3c/webpayments-method-identifiers] Support for PMI's with schemes other than https? (#17)

From: https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-method-identifiers/pull/16#discussion_r88373861

There is a concern that having browsers all over the world fetching a manifest all the time will put significant strain on the hosts of the manifest.

There are protocols that are better at serving static content than HTTP such as IPFS. While they're not supported in most browsers yet, they may be soon.

So, should we be limiting the PMI URLs to `https` as the scheme or rather wording this as something that requires fetching the manifest through a SecureContext or similar?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/webpayments-method-identifiers/issues/17