W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webappsec@w3.org > May 2015

Re: Permissions API vs local APIs

From: Mike West <mkwst@google.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 15:32:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKXHy=dBLw9viEKnYhcZj0O=g=ijUOvb=taxt5woLJ=6xXSkMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
> wrote:
> > Over in
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2015May/0006.html
> > Jonas pointed out that having two APIs for doing the same thing is
> > "nuts". We should probably decide whether we go ahead with the
> > Permissions API or keep doing permission checks on a per-API basis.
> I personally think having a single API, rather than half a dozen
> navigator.*.hasPermission() APIs is better. If for no other reason
> than that's it's likely going to be significantly easier to keep a
> single API consistent, than the half-dozen different ones.
> I'll also note that the reception on twitter from developers for the
> permission API seemed quite positive.

I agree with Jonas. Extending the permission API to give developers a
single place to check with a single consistent style seems like the right
way to go.

Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, @mikewest

Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstrasse 12, 80331 München,
Germany, Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der
Gesellschaft: Hamburg, Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth
(Sorry; I'm legally required to add this exciting detail to emails. Bleh.)
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2015 22:32:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:49 UTC