- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 15:29:36 -0700
- To: John Mellor <johnme@google.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On 23 October 2014 04:10, John Mellor <johnme@google.com> wrote: > Can you elaborate? This would attach no penalty to developers who don't opt > in (at the one time cost of an additional permission prompt); and as I > explained above, developers who do opt in would indeed be incentivized to > always show user-visible UI. Are you concerned that this is not the right > thing to be incentivising? Yes, it increases the cost in terms of battery consumption and user annoyance for push messages. Both of which we strive to minimize. You might claim that the app needs to take responsibility for this, but I'm less certain. It means that important features that provide these measures (do not disturb, more contextual event filtering) are not available to applications by default. I'd like to find better ways of dealing with this problem. This approach seems like more of a cop-out to me. I'm seriously jet-lagged, so only two ideas spring to mind, I'm sure you can find some more if you set your mind to it: Usage budgets might be applied to various resources, after which a SW is activated less often. Or good accounting and reporting (see various activity monitors on different operating systems that account for all sorts of resource usage, or you could generate simple notifications like: "this app is burning your battery/network, turn it off?")
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2014 22:30:04 UTC