Comment by username223
2 days ago
Who wanted their web browser to let hostile programs send notifications and access battery levels, unused fonts, etc.? Ad companies run the web standards bodies, so "people" (i.e. you and me) have to deal with this.
In all fairness, some of these things you've mentioned could be useful. If your battery is low, reprioritize the webapp's functions, lower requests, disable anything not necessary in the moment.
Notifications are just another convenient thing that me and you use every day.
Perhaps these things should be disabled by default, or requested upon being needed, but that's not really your argument it would seem.
> In all fairness, some of these things you've mentioned could be useful. If your battery is low, reprioritize the webapp's functions, lower requests, disable anything not necessary in the moment.
This kind of automated perfomance tuning is almost always more annoying than useful.
> Notifications are just another convenient thing that me and you use every day.
Who is "me and you"?
"Requested upon being needed" might work if it weren't possible for sites to get around it by probing and popping up their own "yes / ask me again later" dialogs. Have the APIs ask on the first call, with a "yes/no + make answer permanent" dialog, and return fake data if the answer is "no." If people were sufficiently annoyed by constant requests for stuff a basic webpage wouldn't seem to need, the web might become a better place.
But yeah, web browsers basically run arbitrary code written by hostile companies, with layers of indirection to confuse accountability. In that environment, you have to weigh "nice to have" against "could be abused," and err on the side of caution.