Well let’s fix that? :)
From a pure consistency perspective, it remains astonishing that this hangs off of `document` (not navigator), is called `requestStorageAccess()` and only gives you cookies (takes no arguments to specify), and still doesn't integrate into the Permissions API
-
-
What I got from the conversation in '17 (perhaps I wasn't listening closely enough?) was "here's what we implemented and are going to ship, no we can't make changes". This is de-facto hostile to the iterative process that makes for good design. People were (and are) sensibly agog
-
We got some useful feedback on the Storage Access API after ~45 minutes of grandstanding and yelling on ITP, and integrated the feedback throughout the spring of 2018. We continue to get feedback and make changes, especially now that 2 out of 3 major engines have implemented.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This isn’t the best time to litigate the specifics. instead, let’s focus on how we can collaborate going forward.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.
You need to land all the privacy protections in Blink first – Partitioned DOM Storage, partitioned ServiceWorkers, partitioned cache, the Storage Access API, capped expiry of client-side cookies, and URL decoration mitigations. 