W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2013

Re: [whatwg] The behaviour of Notification.requestPermission() in Workers

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:05:12 +0100
Message-ID: <CADnb78jXTTTDvn9YjW4saNo5MASi67iivS4xNktvHRHcK2BjVw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikhil Marathe <nsm.nikhil@gmail.com>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Nikhil Marathe <nsm.nikhil@gmail.com> wrote:
> The easiest solution for implementors and authors is to make the
> requestPermission() call in a HTML page before spawning a worker or
> registering a service worker. Inside the Worker scope we then have two
> options:
> 1) requestPermission() is not defined.
> 2) requestPermission() does not ask the user, but uses the permission
> associated with that origin, or denied.
> I believe option 2 is better in terms of having a complete API.
> Feedback is appreciated about what the right approach should be.

Given that Notificaiton.permission exists, I'm not sure what the
additional value of Notification.requestPermission() in a worker
context would be.

Received on Thursday, 24 October 2013 09:05:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:12 UTC