Re: Geofencing API proposal

• From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
• Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 20:28:28 -0700
• To: Marijn Kruisselbrink <mek@google.com>
• Cc: public-geolocation@w3.org
• Message-ID: <CABkgnnXaD9tb6jtc5F4NFF5z+qcAah8vkofVMD_RT-qcANmQJw@mail.gmail.com>

On 15 September 2014 17:20, Marijn Kruisselbrink <mek@google.com> wrote:
> And as promised, here an update to my proposal.


I think that we're almost talking about the same thing at this point.
Most of the differences seem to come down largely to taste.

On the events in the global scope, I see no reason why the SW can't
install listeners on the set of GeofencingRegistration instances when
it is activated/restored in much the same way that it installs a
global listener.  That ensures that the events are the same in both
contexts.  Though I note that you can't alter the set of fences from
the SW in your proposal.  Is that intentional?

Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2014 03:28:55 UTC