-
We link to the spec, but the event definitions don't match the implementation so it's potentially confusing for people or could cause a bad impression. The spec/explainer needs to be free to evolve in…
-
Wondering what the rationale was for attaching monetization to the `Document` object? It doesn't really feel like the right place to attach this, as monetization doesn't itself affect the document or …
-
The spec talks about observing the `head` for inclusions of the particular meta tag... we probably need to rewrite all this to align more with how the HTML parser works.
There are also conflicting …
-
The spec as drafted has multiple issues related to revenue sharing, fraud, and abuse prevention.
#16 and #23 have some discussion of where the `` tag and `monetization` object should live. The `d…
-
I'm wondering if we can merge `MonetizationProgressEvent` and `MonetizationStartEvent` into a single `MonetizationEvent`? `MonetizationEvent` could then be of type "start" and "progress".
-
This is a great proposal - I've been meaning to try and write a similar one myself for some time. (I should probably get a move on and write that...) I'm also not sure how best to contribute - can I j…
-
@marcoscaceres
For the moment using terms inline with the existing implementation :)
Having done some (non deployed) experiments internally re: pausing of streams and associated states/events, p…
-
@marcoscaceres and I started discussing this in brief in #24
-
The current version of IL-RFC-28 has two disadvantages:
* it requires the inclusion and execution of JavaScript in the page context to use it
* it requires that even if the user does not have a WebM…
-
Taking inspiration from https://interledger.org/rfcs/0028-web-monetization/ it could be something like:
* a browser extension that adds `window.WebMonetization.register(handlerUri)` and `window.We…