W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > April 2007

Re: ISSUE-106 and ISSUE-107 required frequency

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 11:50:18 +0200
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Web API public" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.tq9794pywxe0ny@widsith.lan>

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:28:26 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:36:30 +0200, Charles McCathieNevile
> <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
>> Ian suggested that there should be a required frequency for progress
>> events, and there was an issue over whether anything has to fire. The
>> current draft requires that a loadstart fire, and some kind of event
>> that signals an end-condition fire, but there is no requirement that a
>> progress event fire in the middle, nor proposed frequency for this.
>>
>> I propose to leave the specification without further suggestions about
>> frequency...

> I would suggest that you explicitly mention that when the events are
> dispatched is up to the specifications using the progress events, such as
> the hypothetical XMLHttpRequest 2, the WHATWG HTML <video> element
> proposal, etc.

"Specifications MAY make further requirements, such as a frequency for dispatching progress events. Specifications SHOULD not generally make those as recommendations rather than requirements (SHOULD, not MUST)."

Or something like that?

Cheers

Chaals

-- 
  Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
  hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com          Try Opera 9.1     http://opera.com
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2007 09:50:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:57 GMT