On Monday, 14 May 2012 at 17:44, Anant Narayanan wrote: > > We've previously discussed enforcing serving manifests over HTTPS, but > it may not be appropriate to put this into the spec itself. Different > user agents may choose to do different things, ranging from disallowing > installs over HTTP or warning the user before proceeding. I agree - trying to enface this in the spec would be unhelpful. Would make, for instance, testing really annoying because devs would need to shell out a bunch of money for a static IP and an SSL cert. -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Ian Hickson
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Andreas Gal
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Marcos Caceres
- RE: App Manifest & API Proposal SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- RE: App Manifest & API Proposal SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposa... Marcos Caceres
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Scott Wilson
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Scott Wilson
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Marcos Caceres
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Mounir Lamouri
- Re: App Manifest & API Proposal Anant Narayanan
- [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec ready for FP... Arthur Barstow
- Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec rea... Adam Barth
- Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest spec... Arthur Barstow
- Re: [manifest] Is the Webapp Manifest ... Charles McCathieNevile
