-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clarify relationship to Web Application Manifest #54
Comments
In #59 , I've included a text to clarify the relationship. Pasting the content for an easier review:
|
Hi @espinr , i think those are good changes. If this spec is designed to augment / suplement AppManifest, then it'd be ideal to only define those suplements / additions in your spec, instead of effectively inlining the entire AppManifest spec. Woudl that be possible? |
Yes, you are right @pes10k. It makes sense. In the meantime, I've added that this spec introduces constraints to the Web App Manifest. |
This issue is being filed as part of of PING's horizontal review
The substance of the proposal and its intended use cases are similar to the Web Application Manifest proposal (describing a packaged web or web-like application). It would be ideal to combine these in some way, specify one as an extension to the other, or otherwise remove the complexity of two different nearly-but-not-identical proposals.
If thats not possible, it would be good to at least have some non-normative text in this proposal explaining the relationship of the two specs and (possibly) why they need to be mostly-identical-but-fully-independent specs
This is not a blocking privacy issue, but I'm mentioning it since it came up during the review
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: