- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 10:33:36 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- 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 Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> Though based on Andrew's latest comments, I don't know that anyone >> strongly feels that we need to keep the event? > > If you create a non-persistent notification, would you not want to > know when the user agent closed it (only relevant if the user agent > closes them before the document closes)? > > If that scenario is not important, we could remove this event too I think. I don't know of a use-case for that. And given that I think we should define that non-persistent notifications go away after a timeout, I think this is the common scenario. The reason I think we should use timeouts is that this matches all OS-native non-persistent notifications that I know of, and also seems like a better UX. / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 7 October 2014 17:34:40 UTC