W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2008

Comments on Timers

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:10:40 +0100
To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.t7td72qe64w2qv@annevk-t60.oslo.opera.com>

Hi,

Some comments on  
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/section-timers.html  
 from a collegue:

* The specification should put non-zero contraint on the return value of  
the methods. Scripts use if(handle) to check if something was returned.

* It should mention that UAs need to have a lower limit, probably 10ms,  
for Web compatibility. If that's not feasible it should at least allow a  
lower limit.

* It should mention that the timeout given can't always be honoured  
exactly (apart from the lower limit), because of clock resolution, CPU  
load, other JS threads, etc.

* It should say whether the arguments... should be passed at the timeout  
instantiation or in their current state. Consider the following example  
for instance:

   baz = 1;
   setTimeout(foo,10,baz);
   baz = 5;

Kind regards,


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 10 March 2008 19:10:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:53 UTC