On Thursday, February 13, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Marcos Caceres (mailto:mar...@marcosc.com)> wrote:
>
> I still think that leaving out name and icons from a manifest about
> bookmarks is a big mistake. I just made my case here
>
> http://lis
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Marcos Caceres
> wrote:
> > The editors of the [manifest] spec have now closed all substantive
> issues for "v1".
> >
> > The spec defines the following:
> >
> > * A link relationship for manifests (so the
On Thursday, February 13, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>
> I still think that leaving out name and icons from a manifest about
> bookmarks is a big mistake. I just made my case here
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2014Feb/0039.html
I'll reply separately.
> Basically
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> The editors of the [manifest] spec have now closed all substantive issues for
> "v1".
>
> The spec defines the following:
>
> * A link relationship for manifests (so they can be used with rel="manifest">).
>
> * A standard file name for
The editors of the [manifest] spec have now closed all substantive issues for
"v1".
The spec defines the following:
* A link relationship for manifests (so they can be used with ).
* A standard file name for a manifest resource ("/.well-known/manifest.json").
Works the same as "/favicon.ico"