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

[whatwg] Notifications and service workers

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:31:07 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnb78gX3B6aDZqjtzDT+pEjmAD+aNCp8mOqhiwCQAcjYbWAww@mail.gmail.com>
To: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
Cc: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>
Peter and Jake made a proposal for notifications and service workers,
but I believe Jonas wanted something without events. I'll outline the
proposal from Peter and Jake below. Hopefully we can then discuss on
how to move this forward.

We add "serviceWorker" to Notification and NotificationOptions. When a
Notification is constructed within a service worker it is set
automatically, in other environments it needs to be set to a
ServiceWorkerRegistration object (allowing it to be overridden inside
a service worker is probably okay). (If there's an issue with the
ServiceWorkerRegistration object we throw.)

If this succeeds, the underlying notification is associated with a
service worker.

If a notification is associated with a service worker, events are
dispatched to the service worker, rather than to Notification objects
associated with the notification. These events also expose a new
Notification object (cloning is cheap).

Suggestions I remember:
* Expose promises on Notification objects to see whether a
notification has been clicked or closed. (And keep track of such state
* Dispatch events to Notification objects as well even if the
notification has an associated service worker. Requiring message
channel roundtrips for this is cumbersome.

This is also tracked on GitHub:

Received on Tuesday, 23 September 2014 13:31:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:23 UTC