IRC log of manifest on 2020-08-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

05:32:53 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #manifest
05:32:53 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/08/26-manifest-irc
05:32:59 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #manifest
05:33:11 [xiaoqian]
present+ Anssi, plh, xiaoqian, Marcos, yongjing, Krchrist
05:33:13 [xiaoqian]
chair: plh
05:33:17 [xiaoqian]
scribe: xiaoqian
05:33:30 [plh]
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/blob/gh-pages/specs/manifest/docs/explainer.md#a-miniapp-manifest-comparison-with-web-app-manifest
05:33:54 [xfq]
xfq has joined #manifest
05:34:17 [marcosc]
marcosc has joined #manifest
05:34:23 [plh]
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/blob/gh-pages/specs/manifest/docs/explainer.md#a-miniapp-manifest-comparison-with-web-app-manifest
05:34:26 [anssik]
anssik has joined #manifest
05:35:12 [xfq]
scribe: xfq
05:35:20 [xiaoqian]
marcosc: I'm going to talk about where we are at Manifest and the roapmap
05:35:30 [xiaoqian]
... moving to CR, widely implemented
05:35:41 [xfq]
marcos: @@
05:35:41 [xfq]
... web app manifest widely implemented
05:38:09 [xfq]
marcos: @@ new feature requests in CR
05:38:19 [xfq]
... no more features
05:38:22 [xfq]
... before CR
05:38:32 [xfq]
... doesn't mean we can't develop things in parallel
05:39:04 [xfq]
... let everyone focus on a CR feature set
05:39:14 [xfq]
... manifest requires manual testing
05:39:18 [xfq]
... no fun
05:39:35 [xfq]
... weren't able to automate the tests
05:39:45 [xfq]
... identify bugs and interop issues
05:40:08 [xfq]
... quite surprising things like Safari doesn't support the icons
05:40:27 [xfq]
... I won't go into the details
05:40:35 [xfq]
... it's an ongoing process
05:40:39 [xfq]
... that's how we work
05:40:48 [xfq]
... we love to hear about new use cases
05:41:08 [xfq]
... want to make sure that there's a common base
05:41:38 [xfq]
plh: does someone want to speak on the status of the miniapp manifest before we go to the list?
05:42:14 [xfq]
anssi: i've been following the discussions
05:42:21 [xfq]
... high level question
05:42:41 [xfq]
... does the miniapp community see value to interop with the web ecosystem
05:42:52 [xfq]
... how people reach that goal?
05:43:27 [xfq]
... two manifests have overlaps
05:44:30 [xfq]
kenneth: the goal from the TAG is not to have two manifest in the web ecosystem
05:44:46 [xfq]
... we should know why that happens
05:45:46 [xfq]
yongjing: the status of the miniapp manifest
05:45:48 [xfq]
... it's like 80% complete but still needs more details
05:45:59 [xfq]
plh: do you mean it's frozen?
05:46:05 [xfq]
yongjing: not frozen
05:46:22 [xfq]
... we can further update the miniapp manifest
05:46:31 [xfq]
... after receiving feedback from the community
05:46:56 [xfq]
... appreciate the effort plh has maid
05:47:05 [xfq]
s/maid/made/
05:47:32 [plh]
https://github.com/w3c/miniapp/blob/gh-pages/specs/manifest/docs/explainer.md#a-miniapp-manifest-comparison-with-web-app-manifest
05:47:34 [xfq]
... we can better adapt to the web app manifest style
05:48:01 [xfq]
plh: is there desire to adopt some of the stuff in miniapp manifest?
05:48:14 [xfq]
marcos: i can't predict the future obviously
05:48:23 [xfq]
... but if the use cases are compelling
05:48:30 [xfq]
... by all means possible
05:48:44 [xfq]
... currently we're focusing on existing features before CR
05:49:24 [xfq]
... we can go through them
05:49:49 [xfq]
... if there's sufficient interest there's no reason not to
05:50:01 [xfq]
... especially in the living standard model
05:50:28 [xfq]
anssik: @@ convert
05:51:35 [xfq]
... someone who understands miniapps and web apps can answer why web app can't solve some problems
05:51:53 [xfq]
yongjing: let me try clarifying the question
05:52:18 [xfq]
... why don't we use the PWA model?
05:52:26 [xfq]
... @@
05:53:02 [xfq]
... the miniapp runtime, especially packaging, is not interoperable with web apps
05:53:09 [xfq]
... miniapp is more like native apps
05:53:16 [xfq]
... but uses web technologies
05:53:53 [xfq]
... the things to be archived in a package is not web pages
05:54:17 [xfq]
... not http exchanges in wpack
05:54:34 [xfq]
... miniapp doesn't have this kind of requirement
05:54:46 [xfq]
... but how to organize the files as a package
05:55:01 [xfq]
... widgets @@
05:55:33 [xfq]
... not necessarily HTML5-based components
05:55:43 [xfq]
@@: if not HTML5, what's used instead?
05:55:51 [xfq]
yongjing: different in different vendors
05:56:08 [xfq]
... some uses modified version of HTML5
05:56:30 [xfq]
... some are not in a web context
05:56:56 [xfq]
... markup language is not HTML
05:57:31 [xfq]
plh: an example would be the map component
05:57:37 [xfq]
yongjing: and tabs
05:58:27 [xfq]
anssik: what are the implementations expectations for miniapps?
05:58:56 [xfq]
yongjing: for current impls we have a "super app" model and a "quick app" model
05:59:14 [xfq]
... for "super apps" like WeChat, miniapps are run in WeChat
05:59:33 [xfq]
... some of them are based on webviews, some of them are not
05:59:52 [xfq]
... some of the are moving from webview to a native approach
05:59:58 [xfq]
... more like a Flutter style
06:00:43 [xfq]
anssik: it seems like miniapp is a fork, or a different thing from the web platform
06:01:14 [xfq]
yongjing: miniapp vendors are trying to converging with each other
06:01:38 [xfq]
... we would welcome the browser vendors to join
06:01:50 [xfq]
... to support browsers as another runtime
06:02:04 [xfq]
... we have a meeting in the CG to discuss the runtime question
06:02:33 [xfq]
... to see if it's possible to modify the browser runtime to support miniapps
06:02:56 [xfq]
... or to include another engine in a browser to support miniapps
06:03:09 [xfq]
... happy to explore this possibility
06:03:30 [xfq]
... the main contributors of miniapps don't have a consensus on this yet
06:04:11 [xfq]
anssik: interop between web and miniapps can be very challenging from my experience
06:04:24 [xfq]
... but interop among different miniapp vendors is easier
06:04:44 [xfq]
... thanks for your explanations
06:04:48 [xfq]
... clearer now
06:05:11 [xfq]
yongjing: at least in individual technology point of view, like manifest
06:05:18 [xfq]
... we can align as much as possible
06:05:43 [xfq]
anssik: need to figure out the incentive of aligning with each other
06:05:59 [xfq]
... like make porting web apps to miniapps easier
06:06:35 [xfq]
... my limited understanding on miniapps
06:06:47 [xfq]
yongjing: this is one of the use cases we're exploring
06:06:59 [xfq]
... some developers are porting from web apps to miniapps
06:07:17 [xfq]
plh: we can make the job of developers easier
06:07:50 [xfq]
... converge between web apps and miniapps
06:07:59 [xfq]
... and converge among different miniapps
06:08:22 [xfq]
marcosc: if there's interesting things that would benefit the web platform
06:08:32 [xfq]
... that's tremendously useful
06:08:52 [xfq]
... as anssik said, incrementally improve what's already have is the current model of the web platform
06:09:14 [xfq]
... given we have millions of millions of web apps out three
06:09:20 [xfq]
s/three/there/
06:10:38 [xfq]
marcosc: we're trying to force the community to finish the first phase of web app manifest
06:10:49 [xfq]
... but still open to new features
06:10:55 [xfq]
... after the first phase
06:11:23 [plh]
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Feature+Request%22
06:11:30 [xfq]
yongjing: what's the plan after the first phase?
06:11:58 [xfq]
marcosc: I don't expect much delay after the first phase
06:12:51 [xfq]
anssik: after process 2020 it's easier to add new features
06:13:15 [xfq]
marcosc: adding new features is not a challenge in w3c process
06:13:52 [xfq]
... but a challenge to persuade Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft etc. the feature is a good idea
06:14:11 [xfq]
plh: I put a link on irc
06:14:17 [xfq]
... on the feature requests
06:14:21 [plh]
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/804
06:15:19 [xfq]
plh: how we can converge on this example issue ^
06:16:11 [xfq]
anssik: go back to miniapp environment
06:16:30 [xfq]
... is it a reasonable goal to transition between web and miniapps
06:16:39 [xfq]
... if so we should mention that in the charter
06:16:51 [xfq]
... this is a side comment
06:17:18 [xfq]
... if we have two different manifests in REC-track
06:17:23 [xfq]
... membership will ask questions
06:19:00 [xfq]
yongjing: we can mention that in the charter
06:19:11 [xfq]
anssik: i've been charing das wg for a while
06:19:27 [xfq]
... in that group we have connections with cordova/phonegap
06:19:35 [xfq]
... not 100% converge with them
06:19:57 [xfq]
... for example there are apis for accessing sensors in cordova
06:20:32 [xfq]
... miniapp should feed those use cases and requirements into w3c and see if web can solve them
06:21:11 [xfq]
plh: doing an extension would work but in the future new feature @@
06:21:36 [xfq]
marcosc: where things can align they should align
06:22:33 [xfq]
plh: the description of window is the most pressing one now
06:22:52 [xfq]
marcosc: miniapp manifest can have a miniapp properties
06:23:04 [xfq]
... all miniapp-related properties can go into there
06:23:07 [xfq]
... like a namespace
06:24:11 [xfq]
yongjing: one question
06:24:18 [xfq]
... I read through the web app manifest
06:24:33 [xfq]
... is there any text on which properties are optional
06:24:41 [xfq]
... or all of them are optional?
06:24:47 [xfq]
marcosc: all of them are optional
06:25:31 [xfq]
yongjing: kind of worry that the mandatory properties are different
06:26:43 [xfq]
marcosc: @@
06:26:48 [xfq]
plh: regarding permissions
06:26:59 [xfq]
... reqPermissions in miniapps
06:27:09 [xfq]
... what about web app manifest?
06:27:39 [xfq]
marcosc: incompatible with the web's permissions model
06:28:00 [xfq]
... permission prompt when used
06:28:11 [xfq]
... we also have Permissions Policy
06:28:29 [xfq]
plh: upfront is not possible?
06:28:47 [xfq]
marcosc: unless something like Permissions Policy
06:29:28 [xiaoqian]
present+ wanyzitao
06:29:31 [xfq]
... basically everything is allowed unless you disable it
06:29:52 [xfq]
plh: what's the use case for miniapps?
06:30:16 [xfq]
yongjing: most current miniapp implementations have permissions control
06:30:32 [xfq]
... in many cases you need to get a user consent
06:30:40 [xfq]
... before delivering the miniapp to the user
06:31:05 [xfq]
marcosc: that's fundamentally incompatible with web platform
06:31:14 [xfq]
... also incompatible with iOS
06:31:48 [xfq]
... @@ only when users agree
06:32:04 [xfq]
... closely follow the Web's permission model
06:32:44 [xfq]
plh: next step is to keep iterating the miniapp manifest spec
06:32:51 [xfq]
... not based on my pull request
06:33:06 [xfq]
... raise feature requests against web app manifest
06:33:28 [xfq]
marcosc: super excited to see more use cases
06:33:55 [xfq]
yongjing: how do we do that from a logistics perspective?
06:34:10 [xfq]
... @@
06:34:22 [xfq]
marcosc: we can catch up every 3-6 months
06:34:40 [xfq]
yongjing: when we have a compatible version of manifest
06:34:43 [xfq]
... we'll let you know
06:35:02 [xfq]
plh: I call that progress
06:35:18 [xfq]
... can organize another call when we have a compatible version of manifest
06:36:04 [xfq]
[adjourned]
06:36:15 [xfq]
rrsagent, make minutes v2
06:36:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/08/26-manifest-minutes.html xfq
06:58:01 [xfq]
xfq has joined #manifest
07:17:10 [xiaoqian]
RRSAgent, make log public
08:53:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #manifest