W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: Push API - PushRegistration and lifetime

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 21:32:46 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUhhf2R75iF8Rwnw=hJCb7Uf0M3QwhBUj5Ke4T75z3BOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shijun Sun <shijuns@microsoft.com>
Cc: John Mellor <johnme@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 22 October 2014 14:17, Shijun Sun <shijuns@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 1. When the PushRegistration expires, what are the options to notify the UA?  Let's assume the case where the webapp is not active at the time.

A UA needs to be made aware of expiration or invalidation.  This can
be one of two ways: an explicit, prior commitment to a definite
expiration, or - because I've been told that time-based expiration has
issues - an explicit message from the push server indicating this
event.  Both mechanisms could be used in concert.

> 2. In case of either option 1.a or 1.b, assuming the expiration message is not dropped/lost (BTW, another flow path otherwise), I expect the SW should respond to the message and the UA doesn't have to fire the pushregistrationchange event.  Is that a correct understanding?

There's two ways to deal with this: either just surface an event to
the SW (I think that costin noted a preference for this) or the UA
could transparently attempt to refresh the registration and notify the
SW iff the details change.

> 3. Based on the current security model, in case the webapps (or maybe its SW) need to create a new PushRegistration, should the UA first get user permission (again)?

I see no reason to require a new consent experience based on this
event.  This is a function that relates solely to the maintenance of
the existing contract.  (Note that this makes consent naturally
persistent for push, which differs from things like geolocation or
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2014 04:33:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:32 UTC