- From: Doug Turner <dougt@dougt.org>
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:18:56 -0700
- To: <veikko.punkka@nokia.com> <veikko.punkka@nokia.com>
- Cc: <johnnyg@google.com>, <simon.dittlmann@googlemail.com>, <public-web-notification@w3.org>
On Oct 28, 2010, at 10:47 PM, <veikko.punkka@nokia.com> <veikko.punkka@nokia.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29 at 2:38 AM John Gregg wrote:
>
>> If priority is part of the notification construction API, we would be relying on each application to correctly declare its own priority. It is desirable that a "something is on fire" >notification would get priority to "new email", and maybe I'm being cynical, but won't all applications eventually set the priority to maximum to avoid being filtered out?
>
> This is indeed the case if you only have a source declared priority system to use for filtering.
>
>> A system which gives users control over the priorities of various notification sources seems better -- perhaps it could be incorporated into the permissions interface?
>
> A pre-defined, but extensible set of categories would be even more useful. That would let the user deal with all the "new mail" notifications as a group instead of having to set the priority of each of them separately, if he so wishes.
My worries is that it wouldn't be very clear what category to use by web developers. For example, I think we'd agree that webmail would use a category called "mail" (or something similar). But the line gets messy when you think of something like a forum getting a new posting.
Also, I tend to think that we don't really need any of this complexity, and users will just want to block at the site level ("Stop gmail.com from posting desktop notifications", not "Stop any web application with the category of 'foopy' from sending desktop notifications").
Doug
Received on Monday, 1 November 2010 04:19:33 UTC