Reason for deprecation of permissions.revoke()

[asleeguilez]

MDN URL

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Permissions/revoke

What specific section or headline is this issue about?

No response

What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?

who replaces this function?

What did you expect to see?

who replaces this function?

Do you have any supporting links, references, or citations?

No response

Do you have anything more you want to share?

No response

MDN metadata

Page report details

• Folder: en-us/web/api/permissions/revoke
• MDN URL: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Permissions/revoke
• GitHub URL: https://github.com/mdn/content/blob/main/files/en-us/web/api/permissions/revoke/index.md
• Last commit: c58e8c1
• Document last modified: 2023-04-07T19:46:21.000Z

[postmeback]

I searched on the internet about this function. It seems that, there is no alternative to this functionality.

[advitiya7]

I searched on the internet about this function. It seems that, there is no alternative to this functionality.

@postmeback i think the alternative to permissions.revoke() is to use the navigator.permissions.query() method to check whether the user given the permission to the API or not then we can use navigator.permissions.request() to check whether the permission is given or not

[Josh-Cena]

The right way to search for web standard issues is not through Google but through the spec repo itself. In this case you will find w3c/permissions#46. The answer would be "it's replaced with nothing because it just doesn't make sense". We can add this info to this page.

[advitiya7]

The right way to search for web standard issues is not through Google but through the spec repo itself. In this case you will find w3c/permissions#46. The answer would be "it's replaced with nothing because it just doesn't make sense". We can add this info to this page.

can't we add a new method because if someone wants to do it they can using navigator.permissions.query()
or we just have to add the reason for depreciation? either way i can do it

[Josh-Cena]

@advitiya7 The query() method is read-only and IIUC, the permissions API is meant to be persistent rather than transient. I don't think you can meaningfully replace revoke() with anything (to restore to the "unauthorized" state), so a mention of the deprecation reason is good enough. I reckon you just need to read through that issue and summarize the points raised there. Mind how the subject may change within the thread and only document meaningful parts.

[advitiya7]

@advitiya7 The query() method is read-only and IIUC, the permissions API is meant to be persistent rather than transient. I don't think you can meaningfully replace revoke() with anything (to restore to the "unauthorized" state), so a mention of the deprecation reason is good enough. I reckon you just need to read through that issue and summarize the points raised there. Mind how the subject may change within the thread and only document meaningful parts.

@Josh-Cena thanks for the explanation some of the points i was not able to understand but i will try my best to understand them

[Josh-Cena]

Also note that this page will probably be deleted at some point because I can't imagine any browser shipping it. Therefore we should probably add the rationale for the lack of the revoke method to the landing page as well.

[advitiya7]

Also note that this page will probably be deleted at some point because I can't imagine any browser shipping it. Therefore we should probably add the rationale for the lack of the revoke method to the landing page as well.

That seems reasonable can you what changes should i make? Or it is better left as it is?