Re: [push-api] Add optional userVisibleOnly parameter to register & hasPermission (#87)

So we've had a few discussions about this, and while none of this is concrete, we're not convinced by the arguments presented for this particular UX design.  As such I'm willing to look into ways that we can facilitate Google's needs without creating an API surface that anyone would be required to commit to.

With the current form of the API, and the permissions interaction model it implies, I can appreciate most of the logic process that leads to your conclusions, but we still come to different conclusions.  I don't want to be in a position of dictating UX on Chrome, that's not healthy, but there are certain expectations that I think we need to establish.  The model that the current API imposes constraints on UX that could be incompatible with the nascent model that I have in mind based on the discussions I've had so far.

I'm going to talk to our UX designers and some privacy folks before I commit to something more concrete, but I'm currently inclined to propose a different consent model for this API than the one currently specified.  And just to assuage concerns about timeliness, I don't expect that to take long.

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/push-api/pull/87#issuecomment-65687246