- From: Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 09:00:57 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Martin Thomson <mt@mozilla.com>, Miguel Garcia <miguelg@chromium.org>, Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>
The way I would look at this is based on timeframe — if we’re not implementing the Permissions API until 2017 or something, i’d just leave the functionality in the PushAPI spec. If the Permission API is right around the corner, I would remove it form the PushAPI spec. Do any other APIs have a permission check function in their interface? Geo doesn’t (which shares a similar permission model). > On May 6, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> I think Mozilla would be fine with taking the permission API as a >> dependency and implement that at the same time. Implementing the >> permission API should be fairly trivial for us. >> >> But we should verify this with the people actually working on the push API. >> >>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Michael van Ouwerkerk >>> <mvanouwerkerk@google.com> wrote: >>>> Yes, we wanted to ensure this is in the Push API because that seems to >>>> have more implementation momentum from browser vendors than the Permissions >>>> API. We didn't want developers to do hacky things in the meantime. I agree >>>> that once the Permissions API has critical mass, that should be the single >>>> place for checking permissions. > > Martin, Doug? > > > -- > https://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2015 16:01:29 UTC