W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2011

RE: What changes to Web Messaging spec are proposed? [Was: Re: Using ArrayBuffer as payload for binary data to/from Web Workers]

From: Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:15:40 +0000
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: Andrew Wilson <atwilson@google.com>, Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>, "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, Dmitry Lomov <dslomov@google.com>, David Levin <levin@chromium.org>, ben turner <bent.mozilla@gmail.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, ext Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
Message-ID: <9768D477C67135458BF978A45BCF9B38307CD441@TK5EX14MBXW603.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Bug: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12947


-----Original Message-----
From: Travis Leithead 
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 10:49 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: Andrew Wilson; Glenn Maynard; Jonas Sicking; Dmitry Lomov; David Levin; ben turner; public-webapps@w3.org; Ian Hickson; ext Kenneth Russell
Subject: FW: What changes to Web Messaging spec are proposed? [Was: Re: Using ArrayBuffer as payload for binary data to/from Web Workers]

>From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com] On Jun/8/2011 5:24 
>PM, ext Kenneth Russell wrote:
>> My understanding is that we have reached a proposal which respecifies 
>> the "ports" argument to postMessage as an array of objects to 
>> transfer, in such a way that we:
>>
>>   - Maintain 100% backward compatibility
>>   - Enhance the ability to pass MessagePorts, so that the object 
>> graph can refer to them as well
>>   - Allow more object types to participate in transfer of ownership 
>> in the future
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge there are no active points of 
>> disagreement. I think we are only waiting for general consensus from 
>> all interested parties that this is the desired step to take.
>>
>> If it is, I would be happy to draft proposed edits to the associated 
>> specs; there are several, and the edits may be somewhat involved. I'd 
>> also be happy to share the work with Ian or anyone else.
>
>Concrete proposals should be helpful and it may make sense to first use 
>Bugzilla to capture the related issues for the various specs.

I'll get a bug filed with the summarized proposal as discussed in this thread. Thanks!
Received on Monday, 13 June 2011 18:16:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:45 GMT