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

Re: Progress event spec

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 05:47:03 -0000
Message-ID: <001601c7429f$c592bd30$406e11ac@Sniff>
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>

"Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Jim Ley wrote:
>> "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
>> > >
>> > >    MUST fire again at the end, even if that is zero bytes
>> >
>> > ...so that progress bars can be easily guarenteed to reach the 100%
>> > mark, which is important for usability.
>> Using onload is sensible for that, there is no point to require an extra
>> event which breaks backwards compatibility.
> Could you elaborate on this backwards compatibility problem?

Sure, if authors go

.post() -> update UI to indicate something's started happening
event.onprogress -> indicate progress
event.onprogress (complete) -> update UI to indicate things have finished

Then user agents which do not get progress events never see the complete 
status reflected in the UI, however if the UI uses onload to indicate things 
have finished then the script is compatible with images and XHR in user 
agents today.

Received on Sunday, 28 January 2007 05:47:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:22 UTC