Hi, Right now push is supported for windows, but only so called `Toast Notifications`. I want to add the other message types to the as described in this gist [1]. Now in the new message format this would mean to add a couple of fields that are windows specific they should be ignored by the other push services. So I'm wondering if we should do that, or if we should put these fields into a sub category called windows for example: { "message":{ "alert":"HELLO!", "user-data":{ "key":"value" }, "windows": { "template" : "cycle", "title" : "Contoso", "count" : 10, "smallBackgroundImage" : "/Assets/Tiles/smallBackgroundImage.jpg", "cycleImages" : [ "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage1.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage2.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage3.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage4.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage5.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage6.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage7.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage8.jpg", "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage9.jpg" ] } } } What do you think? [1] https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

If we like that settings that are network depended, in a separate 'property', then should we then also move 'content-available' and 'action-category' to a 'apns' property as these are only relevant for apple? On 07/01/2015 18:26, Lukáš Fryč wrote: Hi Erik, I'd prefer a structured format (under "windows" property) it makes more readable code than a flat structure and avoids collisions. Do we have other platform-specific switches we'd need to align with? Cheers, ~ Lukas On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <edewit(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > Hi, > > Right now push is supported for windows, but only so called `Toast > Notifications`. I want to add the other message types to the as described > in this gist [1]. Now in the new message format this would mean to add a > couple of fields that are windows specific they should be ignored by the > other push services. So I'm wondering if we should do that, or if we should > put these fields into a sub category called windows for example: > > { > "message":{ > "alert":"HELLO!", > "user-data":{ > "key":"value" > }, > "windows": { > "template" : "cycle", > "title" : "Contoso", > "count" : 10, > "smallBackgroundImage" : "/Assets/Tiles/smallBackgroundImage.jpg", > "cycleImages" : > [ > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage1.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage2.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage3.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage4.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage5.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage6.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage7.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage8.jpg", > "/Assets/Tiles/cycleImage9.jpg" > ] > } > } > } > > > > What do you think? > > [1] https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9 > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing listaerogear-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On 08 Jan 2015, at 16:17, Erik Jan de Wit <edewit(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > We would need to setup a backward-compatibility layer and thus > cluttering code. The benefit is a clean API though. > This is not an issue as we have a filter in place that converts from the old api to the new one. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev