-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Publish minutes of 2022-01-20 meeting #149
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a handful of clarifications. Most of them are for my own comments, but I tried to add a couple other points that stood out to me during the session.
_minutes/2022-01-20-wecg.md
Outdated
* [carlos] Had previously raised this in the past. Created an issue because I believe this is something the group should do. | ||
* [tomislav] The details are very implementation-specific, not sure if this is something that can be specified. | ||
* [rob] Are we looking to clarify current behavior or attempt to standardize on a specific set of behaviors? | ||
* [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
* [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. | |
* [alexei] If everyone were to implement Mozilla's Limited Event page proposal ([issue 134](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/134)), then we would not have this inconsistency. Still have not heard a satisfactory reason why Google opposes this. |
@ghostwords does this tweak look good to you?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, thank you!
I think the closest to an actual explanation thus far has been that Google cares about low-end devices, which, given that SWs will probably use more not fewer system resources overall, does not make any sense.
09a5b81
to
0c60556
Compare
I have included all suggested edits in the source doc and updated the PR here. I also noticed that the year of the header was off, so I have prepended a commit to fix up the date in the previous meeting notes. |
Since the meeting is tomorrow and the notes have been approved, with the review feedback included without changes, I'm going to merge this now. |
Generated from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkwhEMtMS67JBUkl_WVPZ4lRSKoWcQNlLJSf_GwSXg8/edit using the tool and process from #105.
During this meeting we discussed or mentioned #144, #145, #146, #120, #19, #115, #147, #72, #88, #134.