> Google Chrome is so dominant in both browser-making and standards-making that we’ve forgotten the browser — and user — is always king when it comes to the web. If users want permanent storage they will use alternative browsers for those particular sites.
No, they generally won't. There also aren't really any "alternative browsers" on iOS, they're all Webkit-based.
> So why wouldn’t user settings exist for other kinds of permanent or session storage?
Nobody is saying there shouldn't be any settings or consent in this regard. What we get here is not a setting, we get one major player deciding that there will be no way to properly implement offline web apps on their platform.
I disagree that there’s no way to implement an alternative to Safari, besides Chrome there’s also iCab and other browsers that show not only a completely different UI but also innovative new features. Even if WebKit makes it impossible to remove this restriction, a third-party browser could find a way to intercept calls and keep its own local storage, read and backup native local storage, or provide other means to local storage via proprietary JS APIs, and if that browser is Chrome, it will gain traction. Especially if Apple changes iOS to allow users to change default apps.
No, they generally won't. There also aren't really any "alternative browsers" on iOS, they're all Webkit-based.
> So why wouldn’t user settings exist for other kinds of permanent or session storage?
Nobody is saying there shouldn't be any settings or consent in this regard. What we get here is not a setting, we get one major player deciding that there will be no way to properly implement offline web apps on their platform.