MiniApp Manifest

[xfq]

Wotcher TAG!

I'm requesting a TAG review of MiniApp Manifest.

MiniApp Manifest defines a JSON-based profile file that provides developers with a centralized place to set up essential information associated with a MiniApp (What is MiniApp?).

• Explainer¹ (minimally containing user needs and example code): https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/blob/main/docs/explainer.md
• Specification URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/miniapp-manifest/
• Tests: WIP
• Security and Privacy self-review²: https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest/blob/main/docs/security-privacy-questionnaire.md
• GitHub repo (if you prefer feedback filed there): https://github.com/w3c/miniapp-manifest
• Primary contacts (and their relationship to the specification):
  • Martin Alvarez-Espinar (@espinr, Huawei, editor)
• Organization(s)/project(s) driving the specification: Huawei
• Key pieces of existing multi-stakeholder review or discussion of this specification:
• External status/issue trackers for this specification (publicly visible, e.g. Chrome Status):

Further details:

• [x] I have reviewed the TAG's Web Platform Design Principles
• Relevant time constraints or deadlines: CR in October 2022
• The group where the work on this specification is currently being done: W3C MiniApps WG
• Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification:

You should also know that...

Previous TAG review: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/524

We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please delete all but the desired option):

🐛 open issues in our GitHub repo for each point of feedback

[torgo]

Hi - just picking this up today at our f2f - @xfq we're largely happy to see this work proceed. Before closing, can you confirm back that you've discussed the additional manifest fields - especially the mini-app specific ones - with the web apps working group to make sure there isn't a collision with any work happening in web app manifest itself?

/cc @marcoscaceres

[torgo]

Agreed today to close and focus the miniapp activity in TAG to #762 and #523.

[espinr]

Hi - just picking this up today at our f2f - @xfq we're largely happy to see this work proceed. Before closing, can you confirm back that you've discussed the additional manifest fields - especially the mini-app specific ones - with the web apps working group to make sure there isn't a collision with any work happening in web app manifest itself?

/cc @marcoscaceres

Thanks, Dan. The MiniApp WG intends to reuse web app manifest as much as possible.

Basically, we have identified the overlap of the id and app_id members in the specs. We included the MiniApp app_id time ago and are now discussing the alignment in w3c/miniapp-manifest#43 and w3c/manifest#1048.