Xcode 13 was required

@nbe I never got notified you replied. I am able to set, get and remove session and local storage from my background page/script without issue. I am not using the safari converter however, so perhaps it's an issue with that or how you are going about setting/getting. That being said the person who replied has good advice, I'd do what he says.

Where are you trying to store session data? You mentioned your background script, but it is unclear if you are trying to set session data for the background page, popup, extension page or on a webpage via content script.

I think how you will open the containing app depends on your implementation and from where and how you are trying to do so. Using a custom URL scheme is the way I do it. I can open my containing app from a popup, content script, bundled html page or background by calling the window.open method like so: window.open("customURLscheme");

This seems to be happening to my extension as well, and possible a new related issue? [EXExtensionContextImplementation _derivedExtensionAuxiliaryHostProtocolWithContextClass:]

I am still hoping for clarification here. To be clear, I am curious if it is possible to accomplish similar results as browser.contextMenus.create({...}), when not using web extensions, but rather the Safari App Extension swift api? Further, if the api doesn't exist for those methods, is it somehow possible to use the web extension api alongside the swift api?

I am still searching and hoping for an answer to this, bumping to get some visibility.

Sorry for the late replies. This is not about web extensions. I believe I figured out why this was happening. Since I have the current (non-development) build of my extension on my development machine, I always disable the extension before testing. When I test new builds, I test in Safari and a fresh instance of Safari is initialized, which has my non-development extension disabled. That means every time I re-build, I have to re-enable the extension. If I do not disable the extension before building development versions, I seem not to encounter this. It all sounds rather long winded and confusing, but since realizing this, I haven't encountered the issue, so far.

The icon appearing in the accent color denotes that the extension has access to the current tab. Thank you for the reply. It seems well intentioned but an unfortunate ui decision. I suppose the color scheme is automatically adopted by all extensions without developer ability to change it to something a bit more pleasing to the eye (like the new privacy extension has)? The new privacy extension seemingly has 2 states - active = normal monochrome/grayscale color and inactive - opacity set to x amount It's seems odd that 3rd party extensions don't automatically adopt that scheme...