- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 05:15:20 -0700
- To: Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, Robert Bīndar <robertbindar@gmail.com>, Peter Beverloo <beverloo@google.com>
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:35 AM, Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com> >> wrote: >> > I'm sorry, I meant that you can only use the 'data' attribute, if the >> > data >> > you want to associate with the notification is structured-cloneable. >> > Which >> > precludes lots of interesting stuff, like objects with attached methods, >> > memoized functions, etc. >> > >> > I'm aware that 'data' is structured-cloneable - I'm saying that's not >> > sufficient for many uses. >> >> But if the data that you want to associate with the notification isn't >> structured clonable, how are you going to make that data survive a >> page reload? Keep in mind that for persistent notifications, the >> notification often outlives the page that created the notification. > > OK, I get it - we're talking about different models. I'm talking about the > current Gmail use case, where I don't want notifications to live forever (in > fact, I close them all when you close the main Gmail pane). > > I understand that for persistent notifications, the uses are different. And > again, apologies if I missed the context and the idea was to only remove the > close event for persistent notifications - it's the danger of dropping into > the middle of a thread :) Hopefully the plan is to continue enabling web > properties that want to go the Gmail route to continue doing so, and for > those pages, I think a 'close' event is useful. I think we're talking about both. But I wanted to point out that the code flow you were talking about didn't seem to work for persistent notifications. I'd rather keep persistent and non-persistent notifications as similar as possible. Though "as possible" being key. I.e. I think it's ok for them to be different when that makes sense. I still don't understand the use case you are talking about though. Could you perhaps provide an example of the features that gmail is building and which needs these non-clonable data structures? / Jonas
Received on Monday, 29 September 2014 12:16:16 UTC