To clarify, I'm suggesting a header as an alternative to the html tag, not exclusively. In the same way that Chrome Frame can be initiated either with a header or tag. I'm not familiar with Apache but on Nginx it is dead simple to add a header even for a specific page, static sites included.
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Matt Basta <[email protected]> wrote: > It should also be noted that for folks running on shared hosting, it's an > enormous pain in the ass to add an HTTP header without modifying code. > htaccess files are quite possibly the least intuitive aspect of web > development of all time and it's almost impossible to write great docs > about them because there's so many different ways that something can be > done, but very few of those options work universally. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fred Wenzel" <[email protected]> > To: "Matthew Phillips" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 7:08:16 PM > Subject: Re: Standardizing a <link> for webapp manifests? > > I'm actually against a header for two reasons: > > Headers are sent with every request; depending on the implementation > method of said header, it'll be sent on a lot of pages (or even for > non-HTML assets). A meta tag is less invasive. > > Likewise, you can use a meta tag with static websites, a header not so > easily. > > ~F > > > On Wed Sep 19 17:39:44 2012, Matthew Phillips wrote: > > I prefer an HTTP header as I don't want my index.html cluttered with > > vendor-specific mark up. Can we have something like this: > > > > X-App-Manifest: /manifest.webapp > > _______________________________________________ > dev-webapps mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-webapps > _______________________________________________ dev-webapps mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-webapps
