The InPagePermissionMixin seems like too much
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 21
- Forks
- 4
- Avg merge
- 3d 18h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
As the WebApps WG discussed around the imperative API, it would be good simplify all this just down to showing the request for installation sheet. That only requires knowing if the UI was aborted and if the app was installed.
Throwing in the InPagePermissionMixin seems like too much.
Installation is not about "permission"... it's about showing a showing an installation sheet.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the linked InPagePermissionMixin specification and the issue's discussion of the imperative API. Define whether the install element should retain only UI-aborted and app-installed state, then clarify the simplified interface and its boundaries. Done means the proposal has a resolved scope without the mixin.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- html
- Domain
- web-dev
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100