3 ms·
That's not true. The section the blog post is quoting is saying that the EC can ask another regulatory body to make a decision specifically on whether the techn
by jsnell 3y ago
That's not true. The section the blog post is quoting is saying that the EC can ask another regulatory body to make a decision specifically on whether the technical implementation of interoperability requirements is sufficient.
So it's only about a very thin slice of the DMA to start with, and a slice that's not the part that Apple was intending to violate when removing PWAs, but it's also not a process that Apple could trigger or even be a party of.
As far as I know, nothing in the regulation suggests that gatekeepers can get their compliance plans pre-approved or pre-rejected.
- troupo 3y ago> That's not true. The section the blog post is quoting That's the beauty of reading: you can read more than just the quote, and read the paragraph immediately after. Or the referenced section in the law: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39565987 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39565987
- jsnell 3y ago65 allows asking the EC for clarifications. But that process would (very explicitly) need to be public and allow input from third parties, there's no process for private feedback. In addition to that, the EC might choose to ignore the clarification requests entirely, and whatever decisions they do give are not binding. It's certain that Apple does not have any kind of back channel approval for keeping PWAs Safari-only. That is not a possibility within the regulatory framework.