Notifications has it (as a property instead of a method which is a pain). I think that once the permissions API has shipped in both Mozilla and Chrome we should get future APIs to use it exclusively. Push seems to be a bit border line given the timeline so I think we should just implement in both places.
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Doug Turner <do...@mozilla.com> wrote: > The way I would look at this is based on timeframe — if we’re not > implementing the Permissions API until 2017 or something, i’d just leave > the functionality in the PushAPI spec. If the Permission API is right > around the corner, I would remove it form the PushAPI spec. > > Do any other APIs have a permission check function in their interface? > Geo doesn’t (which shares a similar permission model). > > > > > > > On May 6, 2015, at 8:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote: > > > > On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: > >> I think Mozilla would be fine with taking the permission API as a > >> dependency and implement that at the same time. Implementing the > >> permission API should be fairly trivial for us. > >> > >> But we should verify this with the people actually working on the push > API. > >> > >>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Michael van Ouwerkerk > >>> <mvanouwerk...@google.com> wrote: > >>>> Yes, we wanted to ensure this is in the Push API because that seems to > >>>> have more implementation momentum from browser vendors than the > Permissions > >>>> API. We didn't want developers to do hacky things in the meantime. I > agree > >>>> that once the Permissions API has critical mass, that should be the > single > >>>> place for checking permissions. > > > > Martin, Doug? > > > > > > -- > > https://annevankesteren.nl/ > >