manifest embedded, linked, both? about wpub HOT 6 CLOSED

I think we need to further understand what will be in the manifest and what it might look like before we can answer this...but definitely worth tracking this...

from wpub.

We're not the first ones to discuss this, either:

https://gist.github.com/marcoscaceres/7783977

It's interesting that by virtue of using link it does allow inlining through a data: url if you really want to.

Would that be a useful approach for FPWD, with this being one of the questions we should highlight for feedback?

from wpub.

We're not the first ones to discuss this

correct, see also Appendix A of the Web App Manifest spec which also points to a github comment and www-tag thread discussing the matter.

from wpub.

@mattgarrish:

It's interesting that by virtue of using link it does allow inlining through a data: url if you really want to.

Yeah, although… that would probably be very error prone. Note the comment of Tobie on the possibility to use a meta element; I am afraid (though have not checked) that most of what he says there is also valid for the data url case:

https://gist.github.com/marcoscaceres/7783977#gistcomment-963994

I do not think we should propagate that.

Clearly, the reactions were extremely varied. Note, however, that we may be dependent on the outcome of issue #32: if we go with an extension to the Web App Manifest, then we will not have the liberty of making a choice.

from wpub.

I do not think we should propagate that.

Right, I'm not a big fan of embedding. I don't think we should say anything about it formally, just as web app manifest doesn't. But it is there for the intrepid.

from wpub.

Closing this in favor of #122

from wpub.