Permission API Review: Fwd: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Permissions API

Hey all,

Per previous conversations, it looks like now would be a great time for
others here to give our draft feedback on the Permissions API a look:


https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2015/03/Permissions.md

Regards

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Alex Russell <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: [blink-dev] Intent to Ship: Permissions API
To: Marcos Caceres <[email protected]>
Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <[email protected]>, Philip Jägenstedt <
[email protected]>, Elisabeth Morant <[email protected]>, Philip Rogers <
[email protected]>, Mike West <[email protected]>, Jake Archibald <
[email protected]>, blink-dev <[email protected]>, Mounir
Lamouri <[email protected]>


/me puts TAG hat on

I'm grateful for Mounir's work on updating the design based on feedback. I
think it's getting better *VERY* quickly.

Given the time constraints, I spent some time over the weekend updating the
TAG feedback based on the latest draft
<https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2015/03/Permissions.md>.
The other TAG members (and the list) need to weigh in (I'll circulate it
today to get input ASAP), but I think it covers the bases.

The biggest issues are:

   - The "string-ness" of the status value. I worry about the ability to
   model the full set of permissions without a more extensible type and it
   will be hard to retrofit later
   - Lack of reflection for the majority of web platform permissions
   - An inability to enumerate which permissions are supported by the API

Regards


On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Marcos Caceres <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On April 3, 2015 at 5:28:23 PM, Dimitri Glazkov ([email protected])
> wrote:
> > Looking over W3C TAG activities, seems like they provided useful feedback
> > on the API: https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/issues/45 and
> >
> https://github.com/w3ctag/spec-reviews/blob/master/2015/03/Permissions.md
> >
> > Have the issues mentioned been addressed?
>
> I believe so. Mounir went through each issue raised and made modifications
> to the spec as needed. Not all recommendations were accepted by the
> Editors. Having said that, there is still time to iterate over the design
> as implementation/user experience is gained.
>
>
>