It would be a very good idea to make the offline editor a browser extension. it would make it possible to edit offline on any platform. They could reuse the same HTML5 code, and so many new devices could edit offline.
Edit: A folder with scratches HTML code would be a good idea to it would work on ANY platform, but be a bit harder to use(there would be many other files other that the HTML file that scratch was need.

*cough cough* play store

OwOCinnamonToastOwO wrote:

*cough cough* play store

Not very useful just like that.
Clarifying, there's an offline version of Scratch for Chromebooks via the Google Play Store, and you can see it on the Scratch Downloads page:
Link to download page
Link to Play Store

lolecksdeehaha wrote:

OwOCinnamonToastOwO wrote:

*cough cough* play store

Not very useful just like that.
Clarifying, there's an offline version of Scratch for Chromebooks via the Google Play Store, and you can see it on the Scratch Downloads page:
Link to download page
Link to Play Store

Not all schools want kids accessing the play store. Also, the ST would only have to maintain 1 offline editor and it would work for all devices. Not 1 for chrome OS and 1 for windows. and 1 for mac. It would also support linux.

*GASP* HE SAID THE TWO FORBIDDEN FORUM WORDS!
But seriously, the words for a script to browse stuff and a script that extends stuff should NEVER be used in the same sentence here.
Ok? ok.
Anyways, the suggestion IS a good idea.
But…
sadly, s are not allowed to be discussed.
End. Of. Conversation.
Eggy… OUT.
bye

Edgarm1446 wrote:

*GASP* HE SAID THE TWO FORBIDDEN FORUM WORDS!
But seriously, the words for a script to browse stuff and a script that extends stuff should NEVER be used in the same sentence here.
Ok? ok.
Anyways, the suggestion IS a good idea.
But…
sadly, s are not allowed to be discussed.
End. Of. Conversation.
Eggy… OUT.
bye

What cannot be said is the name of a browser extension. Saying only “browser extension” won't get you alerted or something.

As for the suggestion, I'm not sure whether it would work, since the browsers would need a connection to open a extension?

They would have to break their own policies for this, and packaging an app inside a browser extension isn’t a good idea anyway.

ScolderCreations wrote:

They would have to break their own policies for this, and packaging an app inside a browser extension isn’t a good idea anyway.

The policy says you can't talk about outside browser extensions, so I don't see what policy they would be breaking.

A browser extension would be a no. It's impractical to package an entire app into an extension.
A progressive web app would be better.

ideapad-320 wrote:

lolecksdeehaha wrote:

OwOCinnamonToastOwO wrote:

*cough cough* play store

Not very useful just like that.
Clarifying, there's an offline version of Scratch for Chromebooks via the Google Play Store, and you can see it on the Scratch Downloads page:
Link to download page
Link to Play Store

Not all schools want kids accessing the play store. Also, the ST would only have to maintain 1 offline editor and it would work for all devices. Not 1 for chrome OS and 1 for windows. and 1 for mac. It would also support linux.

Scratch already supports all of those. Plus, most schools blocking the play store are also blocking the installation of extensions. plus a web app reliant on chrome is not something that means an offline editor for windows, mac, and linux. not everyone on those platforms uses chrome, and how many of those would be willing to switch just to get a(and if this is news to you, get ready for a shock)worse offline editor than others that are available.

dhuls wrote:

A browser extension would be a no. It's impractical to package an entire app into an extension.
A progressive web app would be better.

I'm pretty sure that is what they meant.

TimedCommunity wrote:

And how would this be done? I don't think browsers extensions can do that. In the meanwhile, use the google play store and get scratch offline there? It's much easier and if you don't have access to it contact your administrator.

-MyNewAccount- wrote:

Edgarm1446 wrote:

snip

What cannot be said is the name of a browser extension. Saying only “browser extension” won't get you alerted or something.

As for the suggestion, I'm not sure whether it would work, since the browsers would need a connection to open a extension?

ScolderCreations wrote:

They would have to break their own policies for this, and packaging an app inside a browser extension isn’t a good idea anyway.

dhuls wrote:

A browser extension would be a no. It's impractical to package an entire app into an extension.
A progressive web app would be better.

CatGuyAnimates wrote:

ideapad-320 wrote:

lolecksdeehaha wrote:

OwOCinnamonToastOwO wrote:

*cough cough* play store

Not very useful just like that.
Clarifying, there's an offline version of Scratch for Chromebooks via the Google Play Store, and you can see it on the Scratch Downloads page:
Link to download page
Link to Play Store

Not all schools want kids accessing the play store. Also, the ST would only have to maintain 1 offline editor and it would work for all devices. Not 1 for chrome OS and 1 for windows. and 1 for mac. It would also support linux.

Scratch already supports all of those. Plus, most schools blocking the play store are also blocking the installation of extensions. plus a web app reliant on chrome is not something that means an offline editor for windows, mac, and linux. not everyone on those platforms uses chrome, and how many of those would be willing to switch just to get a(and if this is news to you, get ready for a shock)worse offline editor than others that are available.

A lot of people seem to not understand how browser extensions work. Browser extensions can have their own pages that work offline (not just their pop out boxes). Both the pop out boxes and offline pages can use the same technology as ANY web app offline. They could reuse the same code, with a few adaptations for no project page and no project naming. Plus, they could just distribute a HTML5 portable installation ZIP folder containing the HTML5 for the few who don't use a chromium based browser. Also, schools can have a extension allow list.

ideapad-320 wrote:

Browser extensions can have their own pages that work offline (not just their pop out boxes).

But this isn't what browser extensions were for. They were made to enhance web sites, not be their own apps.

dhuls wrote:

ideapad-320 wrote:

Browser extensions can have their own pages that work offline (not just their pop out boxes).

But this isn't what browser extensions were for. They were made to enhance web sites, not be their own apps.

That doesn't matter. Browser extensions work just as well as their own apps. You shouldn't refuse to use a hammer to remove nails because its original purpose is to put them in.

ideapad-320 wrote:

dhuls wrote:

ideapad-320 wrote:

Browser extensions can have their own pages that work offline (not just their pop out boxes).

But this isn't what browser extensions were for. They were made to enhance web sites, not be their own apps.

That doesn't matter. Browser extensions work just as well as their own apps. You shouldn't refuse to use a hammer to remove nails because its original purpose is to put them in.

That’s weird logic, and why can’t they just make a downloadable web app instead?

ScolderCreations wrote:

ideapad-320 wrote:

dhuls wrote:

ideapad-320 wrote:

Browser extensions can have their own pages that work offline (not just their pop out boxes).

But this isn't what browser extensions were for. They were made to enhance web sites, not be their own apps.

That doesn't matter. Browser extensions work just as well as their own apps. You shouldn't refuse to use a hammer to remove nails because its original purpose is to put them in.

That’s weird logic, and why can’t they just make a downloadable web app instead?

That would work good to. When i wrote this i forgot they existed.