- From: Marcos Cáceres <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2022 16:26:52 -0800
- To: w3c/permissions <permissions@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/permissions/pull/390/review/1193717020@github.com>
@marcoscaceres commented on this pull request. > + Permission Store + </h3> + <p> + The user agent maintains a single <dfn class="export">permission store</dfn> which is a [=/list=] of [=permission store entries=]. + </p> + <p> + The user agent MAY remove [=entries=] from the [=permission store=] when their respective [=permission=]'s [=permission/lifetime=] has expired. + </p> + <p> + The user agent MAY maintain additional permission stores with [=implementation-defined=] scope and eviction rules. Which permission store is adressed in a given moment is [=implementation-defined=]. + <aside class="note"> + This is intended to allow a user agent to experiment with user-friendly permission concepts such as per-tab grants. + </aside> + </p> + <p> + A <dfn class="export" data-local-lt="entry">permission store entry</dfn> is a [=tuple=] of [=powerful feature/name=] <dfn>name</dfn>, [=permission store key=] <dfn>key</dfn>, {{PermissionDescriptor}} <dfn>descriptor</dfn>, and [=permission/state=] <dfn>state</dfn>. I wonder if we can avoid `<dfn>name</dfn>` and `<dfn>key</dfn>` if they are just aliases of the other concepts? We could probably just `data-local-lt=` them instead. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/permissions/pull/390#pullrequestreview-1193717020 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <w3c/permissions/pull/390/review/1193717020@github.com>
Received on Friday, 25 November 2022 00:27:05 UTC