On Wednesday, May 28, 2014, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Mounir Lamouri
> >
> wrote:
> > Then, it might make sense to have the manifest same origin as the web
> > page because obviously making start_url same origin as the manifest
> > would be moot if the manifest
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Ben Francis wrote:
> This is the scenario I was describing. Allowing this to happen has both
> benefits (easy to build huge app stores!) and risks (easy to build "fake
> apps").
That seems very confusing UI-wise. Also, this is the web, we don't
need app stores.
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> I don't understand this. That would you mean you'd have to modify the
> content of Gmail to point to this manifest. That sounds bad.
>
To quote Marcos:
The only way one could do what you describe would be for "my own app store"
> to ho
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> Then, it might make sense to have the manifest same origin as the web
> page because obviously making start_url same origin as the manifest
> would be moot if the manifest doesn't have to be same origin with the
> web page ;)
I think we ha
On Wed, 28 May 2014, at 8:59, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> >
> >
> > On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> >> > The only way that gmail would allow "my
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Ben Francis wrote:
> As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight is the
> fact that in the current version of the spec any web site can host an app
> manifest for any web app. That means for example that I could create my own
> app store fo
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> On May 27, 2014 at 3:31:15 PM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
>> One risk of allowing cross-origin manifests might be that these
>> "tailored app experiences" are perceived by the actual app author
>> and/or end users as a "fake a
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> Quick update: the Editors have closed off all "V1" bugs for [manifest] and
> implementations in Blink and Gecko are underway. A thorough review of
> [manifest] by interested parties would be greatly appreciated! You can file
> bugs in our G
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>
> The only way one could do what you describe would be for "my own app
> store" to host its own manifests. So:
> http://myownappstore.com/gmail/index.html
>
> Would contain:
> href="http://myownappstore.com/gmail/manifest.json";>
>
> Which
As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight is the
fact that in the current version of the spec any web site can host an app
manifest for any web app. That means for example that I could create my own
app store for web apps and provide a listing for a GMail app which users
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Marcos Caceres
> >
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> >> > The only way that gmail would allow
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>
>
> On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> > The only way that gmail would allow "my own app store" to use its manifest
>> > would be for
>> Googl
On May 27, 2014 at 3:31:15 PM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
> > To be clear, this is the case I was talking about. The benefit
> is that it makes it much easier to build a large "app store" of "tailored
> app experiences for sites that lack manifests" without the involvement
>
On May 27, 2014 at 2:30:32 PM, Jonas Sicking (jo...@sicking.cc) wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> > The only way that gmail would allow "my own app store" to use its manifest
> > would be for
> Google to include the HTTP header:
> >
> > Access-Control-Allow-Orig
On May 27, 2014 at 9:19:45 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
> > I think a particular problem with having no defined scope for
> apps is when you want to hyperlink from one web app to another.
> A hyperlink with no specified target window will always open
> in the browsing conte
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>
> On May 27, 2014 at 9:25:26 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
>> > As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight
>> is the fact that in the current version of the spec any web site
>> can host an app manif
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> Where this could become a problem in the future is if manifests start
> granting elevated privileges (e.g., access to specific APIs or unlimited
> storage). However, the security model could then be refined so that, for
> instance, only s
On May 27, 2014 at 9:25:26 AM, Ben Francis (bfran...@mozilla.com) wrote:
> > As per our conversation in IRC, something else I'd like to highlight
> is the fact that in the current version of the spec any web site
> can host an app manifest for any web app.
I'm really sorry, seems I wasn't ver
Hi,
Quick update: the Editors have closed off all "V1" bugs for [manifest] and
implementations in Blink and Gecko are underway. A thorough review of
[manifest] by interested parties would be greatly appreciated! You can file
bugs in our GitHub [bug tracker].
We now have the option to cherry-pic
19 matches
Mail list logo
