You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Though the spec is called Web App Manifest, the web generally doesn't add "web" in API names, like currently used in the explainer, both as "web_apps" key and in the file name "web-app-origin-association.json".
We have even tried to avoid "app" when doable, but it seems that now the "id" proposal might even end up adding "app_id" key as Marcos' suggestion.
Maybe we could just call the file for "origin-association.json"? or "originlinks.json" which is similar to assetlinks.json. Anyway, the shorter the name, the more change that people will get the name right, I assume.
"web_apps" also doesn't say much, maybe something like "extensions" instead, or "allowed_extensions"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Though the spec is called Web App Manifest, the web generally doesn't add "web" in API names, like currently used in the explainer, both as "web_apps" key and in the file name "web-app-origin-association.json".
We have even tried to avoid "app" when doable, but it seems that now the "id" proposal might even end up adding "app_id" key as Marcos' suggestion.
Maybe we could just call the file for "origin-association.json"? or "originlinks.json" which is similar to assetlinks.json. Anyway, the shorter the name, the more change that people will get the name right, I assume.
"web_apps" also doesn't say much, maybe something like "extensions" instead, or "allowed_extensions"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: