3 ms·
> edit: also, your site is just obviously biased/poorly done If you can offer recommendations for data-based improvements, I'd sincerely appreciate it! It was
by CharlesW 17d ago
> edit: also, your site is just obviously biased/poorly done
If you can offer recommendations for data-based improvements, I'd sincerely appreciate it! It was made without any concern for Safari "winning", as is probably obvious since it has the lowest score. Methodology described here: https://pwascore.com/about https://pwascore.com/about
- nchmy 17d agolol, not after you behaved so disgracefully here. at the very least, fix the math as i said more than once
- CharlesW 17d agoThe math is correct, see /about for methodology and this summary from the "How Scores Work" panel. About PWA Scores: • The main score shown is weighted for feature importance • Only stable (non-experimental) features are counted • Tap or hover any score to see: – Raw scores (simple % of supported features) – Experimental feature scores
- nchmy 17d agobackground capabilities is 0 for all browsers. there were other weird inconsistencies as well. We can completely leave to the side that your weighting scheme is surely arbitrary or perhaps even biased.
- CharlesW 17d agoBecause they're experimental. Since that's confusing even with a key, it may be better to hide experimental features/categories by default. > We can completely leave to the side that your weighting scheme is surely arbitrary or perhaps even biased. Hover on any number to see both "raw" and "with experimental/non-standard features" scores. If you do this to the overall score, you'll see that Firefox benefits the most from this.