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

Re: Permissions API vs local APIs

From: Miguel Garcia <miguelg@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 11:13:17 +0100
Message-ID: <CAGTrua3b1YwJPgo2L7XeM+aJ9+SSe_65gd_cfRRCBa=Ko6ZsoA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, WebAppSec WG <public-webappsec@w3.org>
Agreed, I think we need a backwards compatible solution until the
permission API gets some traction but once Mozilla ships it I think new
APIs should just use the permission API.

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Michael van Ouwerkerk <
mvanouwerkerk@google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Mike West <mkwst@google.com> wrote:
>> > 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.
>>
>> Yet others at Google are pushing the expose them twice strategy...
>> Perhaps because the Permissions API is not yet ready?
>>
>
> Yes, we wanted to ensure this is in the Push API because that seems to
> have more implementation momentum from browser vendors than the Permissions
> API. We didn't want developers to do hacky things in the meantime. I agree
> that once the Permissions API has critical mass, that should be the single
> place for checking permissions.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>>
>>
>
Received on Friday, 8 May 2015 02:25:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:54:13 UTC