On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 8:13 AM, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> So how would that work if open gmail.com twice, in two distinct
>> browsing contexts? Long term we want those to be able to use distinct
>> threads I think, but they should be able
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Andrew Wilson
> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Anne van Kesteren
> wrote:
> >> Chrome currently does not seem to do any of this particularly well,
> >> but when you click a notification fro
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Chrome currently does not seem to do any of this particularly well,
>> but when you click a notification from say the notification center
>> there should be some "going to the rele
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Andrew Wilson
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren
> wrote:
> >> This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
> >> window the notification would be for.
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
>> window the notification would be for. For normal workers this seems
>> like less of a concern.
>
> Not sure wh
Sorry, missed this the first time through:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> There is some interest in exposing Notification objects in a worker so
> creating one does not require a postMessage() roundtrip.
>
> This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not cle
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> You could do this today anyway, manually, right? (That is, the page could
> provide an API that it vends as a port that just proxies the notification
> API.) How necessary is it to do this natively?
Not entirely clear yet. It would just be conv
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:40:16 +0200, Anne van Kesteren
> wrote:
> >
> > There is some interest in exposing Notification objects in a worker so
> > creating one does not require a postMessage() roundtrip.
> >
> > This seems problematic for shared worker
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Simon Pieters wrote:
> My knee-jerk reaction is to tie it to MessagePorts, so that if you make a
> notification on a port, the window that owns the entangled port displays the
> notification. If there isn't an entangled port or if it's not in a window, I
> guess it
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 16:40:16 +0200, Anne van Kesteren
wrote:
There is some interest in exposing Notification objects in a worker so
creating one does not require a postMessage() roundtrip.
This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
window the notification would be for
There is some interest in exposing Notification objects in a worker so
creating one does not require a postMessage() roundtrip.
This seems problematic for shared workers as it is not clear which
window the notification would be for. For normal workers this seems
like less of a concern.
If we go w
11 matches
Mail list logo