Re: [w3c/webpayments-payment-apps-api] The relationship between payment apps and service workers (#33)

To be clear for @jakearchibald and @marcoscaceres there are two manifests being proposed (although @rsolomakhin would like these combined in cases where the payment method owner only allows their own payment app to be used). 

The first is a manifest for the payment method which could describe, among other things, which payment apps can be used to pay using the payment method, which origins these apps can come from (and now possibly which merchants can detect for the presence of an app supporting that method - see https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/issues/247) etc.

The second is akin to app manifest and describes the payment app itself. Our examples are already re-using numerous concepts from app manifest so it seems like a good fit. The issue is that the relationship between manifests and service workers seems poorly defined at the moment so while we'd like to use manifests we may have to provide imperative versions of everything in a manifest through the service worker registration hook instead.

Question to the two of you is, can we come to an agreement about using app manifest with service workers in a way that makes sense for apps where the service worker really is the app or is app manifest just a way to put icons and context on html apps?

-- 
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-payment-apps-api/issues/33#issuecomment-246307564