- From: Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 13:46:50 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Nikhil Marathe <nsm.nikhil@gmail.com>
On Thursday, October 24, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Nikhil Marathe <nsm.nikhil@gmail.com (mailto: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. Portability of code between worker and non worker? --tobie
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2013 11:45:49 UTC