Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Expose GeoLocation to workers (#745)

> I'm one of the editors and designers of service workers (@wanderview is another designer), so I know a thing or two about what they were designed for :smile:

I know exactly who you are Jake, and you're by no means diminished in by eyes [Ben](https://github.com/wanderview).

> but service workers are terminated when they aren't needed.

That "_doesn't 'disprove' what I'm saying._" When a user is in-motion, Position update events **_will_** be delivered to any **_existing_** Service Worker during the _grace period_ resulting in a favourable SW:Interesting-Geolocation-Event ratio.  _Nothing_ you have said or claimed contradicts that!

What's more, the _grace period_ is reset for each event serviced thus extending SW longevity on demand.

Wandering around yelling "service workers are terminated when they aren't needed" or  "The Sun will come up tomorrow" adds little to the debate or design.

> Both Chrome and Firefox will terminate service workers when they're inactive.

Is there an echo in here? What, as opposed to terminating the service worker when it's active?

> I appreciate you made efforts to avoid being what I'd call an arsehole… briefly, but if you want to continue this conversation you're going to have to give it another go and stick with it.

Well, that's charming isn't it? Have to say I struggle with Yoav's definition of "zero-tolerance" here.  Stand-ups with you must be a hoot when someones dares to challenge you?

> I've abandoned responding to your post, but I'd happily continue if you apologise and restate your questions in a non-aggressive and polite manner. 

Honestly, don't do me any favours, silence is good.

Look, I just don't know why personalities keep getting involved here. Geolocation is a feature in high-demand, essential to the future of Web Apps in the fight against Native Apps, and a technically appropriate solution has been proposed. Can we not concentrate on the technical merits of the proposal?

The cult-of-personality and fiefdoms surely have no place in evaluating solutions here?

As I have said before several times, I will happily disappear and leave you all in peace if you simply implement Background Geolocation. It's not my baby. 

And yes, I'm an arsehole. It's a big part of what makes me me and I've learned to embrace it. Yes I've deliberately had a go at you because I've cynically sought to use your well deserved fame and profile to raise the visibility of my proposal. Shoot me! What other tools do I have? Try to empathise with someone on the outside trying to get an idea up for a change.

So yes, I've had several cheap shots at your expense and if they were other than water off a duck's back then I apologise and mean it. I would be mad not to value and seek your opinion.

Anyway 'uddersfield got up! What are you so miserable about?

BTW, Being an arsehole is not my only talent. I have been known to buy my round  which is more than I can say for my first-out-of-the-cab and last-to-the-bar Norve'n Monkey mates from Holmfirth :-) 


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/745#issuecomment-306660414