Spec cleanup #34
Spec cleanup #34
Conversation
| </p> | ||
| </section> | ||
| <section id="sotd"> | ||
| <p> | ||
| This specification is currently a work in progress. Implementors should | ||
| not expose the API surface to the open web. | ||
| This is an early draft of the Badging API spec. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not really sure what to put here? It’s not in the w3c so it’s not a spec yet, but it’s not really a draft either.
(I’ve copied this from the WebShareTarget spec, mostly I just wanted it to show up as changed in the diff).
| alongside the symbolic representation of the application in the user's | ||
| operating system (for example, as a small overlay on top of the | ||
| application's icon). | ||
| When the application's flag is <a>set</a>, the user agent SHOULD display |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this fixes #12
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm I think #12 was about completely removing the notion of this being related to an installed app. e.g. if it worked in a tab, it could potentially be used without the app being installed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, okay. I don't know how I feel about that. The one Badge per application example gets kind of hazy.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How would we treat this in per tab land? I think there has to be some kind of guideline about what gets badged, and I wouldn't like it to work differently based on whether or not the app is installed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's true. Application scope is the simplest thing to use. Let's keep it and comment on the bug.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has come up again in #35
This cleans up a few errors/warnings from ReSpec.
Preview | Diff