W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2014

Re: [whatwg] Notifications and service workers

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 18:29:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnb78j25z1sRpZ2tnqbF2mzU9OzV3FUevO8mm6hkZX5T+PGNg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com>, Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>
On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> While JS running in the page can't tell a difference, the
> user certainly can so it can still be perceived as a breaking change.

Yeah, we'll need to see if new Notification() can be changed enough or
whether we need three types of notifications...

>> Yeah, it seems like we need to keep this. Through opt-in works.
> It seems like if we keep this event it should at the very least be
> possible to tell "closed because of user action" from "closed because
> of timeout or other platform policy". And maybe also "closed because
> of application calling .close()". Otherwise it doesn't seem like it
> meets Andrew's use case or the use case above.

I added the service worker API now, but have not addressed this
particular point yet. Does anyone have a good idea of what should be
done here?

> Note that I don't actually think that we need to even return a
> Notification instance when a persistent notification is created.

Fair, I return undefined now.

Received on Monday, 6 October 2014 16:30:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:24 UTC