Re: [w3c/push-api] Does PushManager subscribe() need transient activation check? (Issue #346)

annevk left a comment (w3c/push-api#346)

I took a fresh look at fixing this and one of the issues I'm running into is that a large part of `subscribe()` is in parallel, but doing this properly requires it not to be.

At least, I think we want to check for user activation and consume it immediately? And we probably only want to check for user activation if we have to ask for permission.

Also, I think everything up to the permission check can be done synchronously (rejection should probably continue to be from a task). We should probably also remove the note about allowing "validation order" to happen in any order. We decided a long time ago that exception order is important. Individual APIs cannot really decide to override that. Shall I create a PR for that first?

@saschanaz WDYT?

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/push-api/issues/346#issuecomment-3546076722
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/push-api/issues/346/3546076722@github.com>